Subject: Problem with %s expansion (ssh)

From: "Hugh MacMullan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 17:02:46 -0400

Folks:

Hey, I've gotten pine with ssh/imap working:

1 - verify that I can ssh from pine client to imap server with no password
2 - build pine
3 - install the WU imapd somewhere on the imap server and link to it from
/etc/rimapd
4 - install pine and modify .pinerc as follows:
  rsh-open-timeout=0 (to disable it)
  ssh-command="/usr/local/bin/ssh imapserver -q -l myuserame exec
/etc/rimapd"
  ssh-path=/usr/local/bin/ssh
  ssh-open-timeout=10

Now, as I said, this WORKS. However, I don't want to have to put
/usr/local/bin/ssh or imapserver (the actual name of the server) or
myusername (the actual username) ... the %s's of the default ssh-command:

ssh-command="%s %s -l %s exec /etc/r%sd"

are supposed to take care of that, correct? Well, it doesn't work for me. I
tried only using the %s for any ONE of the 4 variables, but it doesn't work
for any of them individually, either. Is there some build flag in pine that
I'm overlooking for this? Or some .pinerc setting?

Also: oddly, the servername (imapserver) won't work when fully-qualified:
imapserver.mycompany.com. Strange? Yes. Thoughts?

Thanks!
-Hugh

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 For information about this mailing list, and its archives, see: 
 http://www.washington.edu/pine/pine-info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Gopi Sundaram <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 16:42:13 -0500 (CDT)

On Tue, 13 May 2003, Hugh MacMullan wrote:

> Also: oddly, the servername (imapserver) won't work when
> fully-qualified: imapserver.mycompany.com. Strange? Yes. Thoughts?

Define "won't work". Take a look at the .pine.debug1 file to see what
Pine gets back from the server when it tries the ssh. The FQDN may not
be in your known_hosts file. So ssh to the FQDN once, verify and accept
the key, and then try Pine.

-- 
Gopi Sundaram
http://www.zrox.net/Mail/Pine/

---

From: Kenneth Crudup <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 14:29:44 -0700 (PDT)

> Hey, I've gotten pine with ssh/imap working:

Why would I use this vs. standard SSL/TLS IMAP from my provider?

Just curious,

	-Kenny

-- 
Kenneth R. Crudup    Sr. SW Engineer, Scott County Consulting, Los Angeles, CA
Home:	3801 E. Pacific Coast Hwy #9, Long Beach, CA 90804-2014 (888) 454-8181
Work:	2052 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92606-4905	   (949) 252-1111 X240

---

From: "R. Stewart Ellis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 18:31:42 -0400 (EDT)

I have been using pine 3.95q directly on the mailspool for years
because when 4.x first came out, and for the next several releases
until I quit tracking it, pine was unable to find text within [] on
the Subject: line, which several of the lists I subscribe to use to
flag their messages in your mailbox.

We have just changed our mail distribution scheme on campus to force
everyone to use IMAP and I wanted the increased security of ssl, so I
tried the latest version of pine (4.53) installed on campus, and I
found really bizarre behavior when doing aggregate search commands,
which I use extensively to sort and manage folders.  pine could not
find all sorts of strings in the Subject: header, such as =?big5? at
the beginning of the Subject: header.  Searching on all text for big5
also failed to select the above messages.  Similar searches for other
Asian charset strings in the Subject: header failed to showup.

I read something about improved searching in headers in the release
notes for 4.55, so I compiled and installed it local to my account,
and it handled some situations better.

Searching comp.mail.pine on google or the pine-info archive I found
some statement that pine does not expose anything on the Subject: line
within square brackets because the IMAP standard says you are not
supposed to.  I have not checked the IMAP standard yet, but if that is
true it is both bizarre and insane.

I was considering hacking the source to fix that behavior (and also
investigate adding regex ability to searches) when I ran into a
discussion in pine-info in March where Eduardo Chappa told someone to
use the 'w' command followed by ^X to match all messages in the index
that show a given string.  Interestingly enough, this gets past the
problems I not above in finding certain strings within the Subject:
line.  However, I still do not understand why the search commands
would not work orthogonally.  Why can I search within the [] with
w<string>
but not with ;th<string><ret>

???

I would appreciate discussion, justification, plus any leads on making
this work the way I want, including the ability to use regexes.

Stew Ellis
-- 
  R.Stewart(Stew) Ellis, Prof.of Appl.Socl. Informatics  Kettering University/
  Liberal Studies Dept.        [email-masked]  ()    ___________________
  Flint, MI 48504 810-762-9765 Free speech&software /\   /   _____  ______
  Sec/abuse Team; Webmaster emeritus: www.kettering.edu /________/ /  /  / /
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 For information about this mailing list, and its archives, see: 
 http://www.washington.edu/pine/pine-info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Hugh MacMullan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 19:31:09 -0400

Thanks, Gopi!

Doh.  Getting the FQDN into the known_hosts did the trick.  Fixed both
problems ... it was using FQDN with the %s so it failed, so the 'second'
problem was actually symptomatic of the entire issue!

Thanks again, Hugh

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Gopi Sundaram
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 5:42 PM
To: Pine Discussion Forum
Subject: Re: Problem with %s expansion (ssh)

---

From: "bill douglas" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 21:14:14 -0400

can you help find lost Email thank's villium

---

From: Nancy McGough <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 09:16:27 +0100 (BST)

> Why would I use this vs. standard SSL/TLS IMAP from my provider?

If you have ssh access to the system that's running the IMAP
server, the advantage over SSL/TLS is that you can access the
IMAP server using ssh keys rather than passwords. This is useful
if you want to avoid typing your password and you are using a
version of Pine that was not built with PASSFILE support. And
even if you have the option of using the Pine PASSFILE, it's
better because the Pine PASSFILE is very easy to crack (I do it
every time I forget a password!).

Hope this makes sense,
Nancy

-- 
Nancy McGough
Infinite Ink
<http://www.ii.com>