On Monday 09 August 2010 12:43:16 Justin P. Mattock wrote:On 08/09/2010 02:35 AM, viresh kumar wrote:On 8/9/2010 2:31 PM, Matti Aarnio wrote:On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 12:26:24PM +0530, viresh kumar wrote:I missed this information in my last mail. We are using git send-email
for sending patches. As patches will go through Microsoft exchange
server only, so they are broken.
Let your boss complain to your IT keepers.
"These are Machine-to-Machine messages, they must not be modified!"
It would probably be "against corporate policy" to use gmail for these
emails...
We got one solution: Upgrade Exchange server to SP2.
Lets see if our IT department does this upgradation.
that or just blast them with some cryptology..i.e. pretty sure if your
message was encapsulated(AH/ESP) they couldn't tweak it.. but then
sending such encryption to a public list would require a _key_ on the
other side.. wishful thinking...
(just a thought)...
Shouldn't just signing the message be enough? The server (normally) would not
alter it, otherwise it will break the signature (which is a too obvious bug
even for Microsoft). Or am I missing something here?
PS: A local SMTP with DKIM signing capabilities could be another possibility,
assuming Exchange does not break such signatures.