I can also confirm that 2.0.6-beta9 fixes my issue with this too. Also with my own exchange server!

In T3656#109404, @aheinecke wrote:

But that's it.
With these Options set and explicitly unchecking Sign & Encrypt before sending I get the exact same behavior that you two describe. Mails are sent unencrypted.

Okay, so on Suse we have the same problem w/o the somewhat intrusive changes of Fedora. The inetresting thing is that segv code part is the same as used in Linux.

But that's it.
With these Options set and explicitly unchecking Sign & Encrypt before sending I get the exact same behavior that you two describe. Mails are sent unencrypted.

In T3656#109402, @JHohmann wrote:

Yes, I also have this option enabled:

And no, I disable Signing and Encryption, before enabling PGP Encryption for the specific email

Yes, I also have this option enabled:

I have now also the error T3662
Will try also 2.0.6-beta9

In T3656#109394, @Mak wrote:

Ahh, and yes I use a public personal s/mime cert to sign my mails. nothing else.

OK, found the problem now. Its the smime settings. I have set them to sign all outgoing mails. And thats where the problem starts...

Ahh, and yes I use a public personal s/mime cert to sign my mails. nothing else.

Thanks for having a look :)

My too, no outgoing rules.

The issue also occurs on openSUSE Tumbleweed:

libgpg-error is version 1.27: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libgpg-error/tree/f27
You can find the patches applied to libgcrypto here: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libgcrypt/tree/f27

I do not have any rules configured that are applying to outgoing mails. (As far as I can see them with a non-administrative account)
Are there any group-policies, that might affect the behavior of Outlook regarding to GpgOL?

Thanks for the patch. The "fixme" indicates that I probably was just too lazy to add and test support.

Another question: Any outgoing Filters (Email Rules)?

Thanks for the report. I have a few questions, though
Which version of libgpg-error are you using?
What are the changes Fedora made to libgcrypt (and libgpg-error)?
Which CPU, what compile options and which compiler version?
Can you repeat this with a stock libgcrypt and libgpg-error?

@JHohmann Your log is similar in that I can see two Write events after the send of which there should only be one. Somehow we seem to do crypto on a copy mail object and another mail is acutally sent.

I don't think that it is possible to create you an account.

Quoted Text

Any chance that I could get a temporary test account on your Server?

We have the same problem.
Sent emails are not encrypted with gpg4win 3.0.2
Outlook 2016
Exchange 2010
Locale: German
Plugins: Skype, OneNote, Sophos

This diff should include all the changes necessary to add support:
https://gist.github.com/lukele/0973e64deb9d422a648e6fbbd55573ac

I can confirm that this appears to be fixed in 2.0.6-beta9.

I absolutely agree this support doesn't particularly make sense. A user of GPG Suite reported the issue, since their internal keyserver requires basic auth. They couldn't exactly explain why, and I told them that it doesn't make much sense.

Why do you need this for a keyserver? Keys are public and in-house keyservers should be at a local address and there need to be strict provisions not to upload to a public keyserver. Maybe LDAP or the kDNS thing (which is currently disabled) would be better for such use cases.

I find your question confusing. I'm the reporter of this bug. All the efforts and tries of gniibe and myself are documented above.
Or do you refrer to something else ?

Can you exactly explain how you tested this?

I also have the 2.1 Card which has this bug
Version ..........: 2.1
Manufacturer .....: ZeitControl

We now have update handling in the installer and this is the first thing the update handling fixes.

I understand now that README's for other languages are installed as aliases and added some missing ones.

I'm using gnupg 2.2.4 and this problem repros for me, and it impacts downstream things like pacman-key (Arch Linux) quite insidiously, which fails with an misleading error message that would not point a regular user to this line of investigation.

For T3662 (PGP/Inline problem with Microsoft Exchange Online) I had to change the code used to send PGP/Inline.

I've changed the behavior now so that PGP/Inline also works with Exchange Online.

In T3656#109246, @Mak wrote:

I sent it to a user on a different Mailserver. On my setup its nothing special... Win 10 Enterprise N en, Office 365 Pro Plus en, Kaspersky Internet Security. Server Win 2012 R2 with Exchange Server 2013 and GFI Mailessentials.
I don't think there is anything special... :-(

The status is now shown and updated.

No longer blocks with that commit. Keylistjob is started in the background. As long as the keylistjob is running the validity is shown as "Updating..."

This is not with 2.0 but with 2.2.3 / current master.

gnupg 2.0 reached EOL - there won't be any fixes.

The install location does not have anything to do with that. I just always have my development installations directly under C: so that I can modify them without admin rights.

ok,
well I run "it" on Power Shell ( Debuggable Package Manager ) and I got ..

I sent it to a user on a different Mailserver. On my setup its nothing special... Win 10 Enterprise N en, Office 365 Pro Plus en, Kaspersky Internet Security. Server Win 2012 R2 with Exchange Server 2013 and GFI Mailessentials.
I don't think there is anything special... :-(

Do you mean that GnuPG installed to c:/gnupg/bin/ crashed if that mentioned --homedir is given but it does work if it is installed at the standard place? Please run "gpgconf --version" in both ways.

@hs could you please retest with 2.0.6-beta8 http://files.gpg4win.org/Beta/gpgol/ and attach the log file again.

As this is still waiting for info for two years and I can't reproduce with current GpgOL -> Resolved.

Implemented with: https://commits.kde.org/kleopatra/9d1ebcb1e5f6b44a745c7e947f2e8eaf88fff786