Mutt/GnuPG doc initial release

[Owen Blacker]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Horacio wrote (2001-09-25 T 21:15 +0200):
>
> So I should disable one feature in my MUA (it is not PGP or GPG that
> is configured to verify automatically) because some people just do
> not want to make a fair and rational use of digital signatures.

So I should disable part of the way I communicate electronically and not
avail myself of one of the advantages of cryptography because some
people just don't wish to ~request~ the validation of signatures and
insist on doing them all automatically?

I do think that authenticating everything I say is fair an rational.
Further, it makes a point to people who don't know much about
cryptography, that maybe they should do.

> Ok, just hope you get the same type of responses to your problems
> through life, as you just deserve them.

We could phrase inflammatory questions at each other for a very long
time.  Personally, I have better things to do, I would assume you
probably do too.  I don't really think there's any other option here
than agree to disagree, in silence.

> > > I see, meaning you don=B4t give a monkey=B4s ass whether it=B4s
> > > a bother for subscribers or not???
> >
> > Frankly, no I don't.  Let me restate, I firmly believe that
> > all mail should be signed.  I also believe that all mail
> > should be encrypted, irrespective of how secret people want
> > to keep the contents.  I militantly believe that ~all~
> > communications should be encrypted.  Then messages that are
> > won't look out of place.  The only problem is that it's a
> > lot more hassle persuading everyone I know to install gpg
> > in order to read my mails...
>
> See, some people firmly believe that all persons should be straight.
> They are on their own right.  But they would be wrong if they went
> trying to impose those beliefs in any way whatsoever to those who
> are different or think different.

But I'm not imposing anything on anyone.  You're trying to impose on me
that I can't sign every mail I send, because you don't want to wait a
couple of seconds for my signature to validate.

Again, we can phrase these questions in as inflammatory a fashion as you
like.  I don't think either of us is being particularly constructive on
this matter by discussing it further -- we disagree on a fundamental
point and neither of us is likely to persuade the other.

> If you really want to advocate crypto on mail, you could do things
> like adding your fingerprint at the bottom of messages after your
> non-digital sig, or a page explaing why it should always be used and
> a pointer to that page at the bottom of your messages.

But neither of these performs the function of a digital signature.  Part
of the reason I sign almost every mail I send is to avail myself of that
functionality.

> > > You know, it=B4s like all those annoying vcards, or those
> > > long signatures with ascii-disart included.  They are not
> > > big deal, but they are not good nettiquete either.
> >
> > I disagree that it is like those at all.  And, tbh, I'm not
> > sure that I'd find a small vCard attachment an annoyance,
> > or Ascii art, for that matter, but I don't use them because
> > it's accepted netiquette.  I just don't feel that digital
> > signatures are the same thing.
>
> Alright.  I can=B4t say more about this if your rule for measuring is
> that of acceptance.

Again, you're verging on the inflammatory.  I made two points here,
firstly that I think it's an unfair comparison and secondly that, as it
happens, I don't find the things you mentioned an annoyance.  THe first
was more objective than the second, which was intended to be subjective
opinion.

> > > > Imho, of course :o)
> > >
> > > Of course, iyho.
> >
> > Which is where I think the difference lies.  If that's the
> > case, we may as well stop now, as I don't think either of
> > us is likely to persuade the other  :o)
>
> Right so.

:o)


O x
- --=20
Owen Blacker | Senior Software Developer and InfoSecurity Consultant
See http://www.owens-place.org.uk/pgp.html -- more about my PGP keys
Sig  0x3e2056b9 | 18cd 92aa 32aa 81b9 f5e8  c520 6475 6239 3e20 56b9
- --
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
 safety deserve neither liberty nor safety --Benjamin Franklin, 1759

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE7sN6+ZHViOT4gVrkRAqGrAJ9kMTHSesmz8bpIzZxQ/qU11gfC6wCdFQKL
msV47/QvGWmmVhef4u9596M=3D
=3DWb/O
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----