PGP/MIME considered harmful for mobile
dougb at dougbarton.us
Sun Feb 27 05:28:53 CET 2011
On 02/26/2011 18:53, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 27/02/11 1:24 PM, Jameson Rollins wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 21:02:08 -0500, Avi<avi.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Why? Inline is simple and effective. I'm curious as to why you
>>> feel MIME is so much better.
> Thanks for the link.
> I'd only add that in-line is fine for encrypting messages since all
> the data in-line signing may whinge about (e.g. some UTF-8 characters)
> would be safely tucked away inside the encrypted block.
If you look at the characteristics of the actual messages encrypted mail
is very similar whether it's in-line or MIME. It's signed messages that
make things interesting because the signature in a MIME message is
actually (sort of) an attachment but also sort of not, which is why it
confuses simple mail readers like Outlook Express.
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
More information about the Gnupg-users