Arguments for inline PGP
dsrbecky at gmail.com
Tue Aug 9 13:59:15 CEST 2005
Thomas Kuehne wrote:
> Alphax schrieb:
>>Thomas Kuehne wrote:
>>>>Points taken - Have you ever looked at an signed (using MIME) message in
>>>>OutlookExpress? AAAARRRGGGG .....
>>Sorry, I've never used Lookout.
> The attachment is a snapshoot of David Srbecky's recent MIME signed post
> "Re: Extra information in public key" to this list.
> If the MIME declaration is change from
> multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; ...
> multipart/mixed; micalg=pgp-sha1; ...
> OutlookExpress displays the message just like Mozilla or KMail without
> encryption plugins.
Sorry for that. I do not know that happened. (Could it be some misuse of
"Edit as New..."?)
I do not use inline because I find the extra stuff annoying. However,
MIME can look really nasty too. That's I would prefer to save the
signature in the mail headers.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 254 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20050809/a604ffac/signature.pgp
More information about the Gnupg-users