pgp/mime vs in-line pgp
Per Tunedal Casual
pt at radvis.nu
Wed Apr 14 10:31:30 CEST 2004
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
At 09:56 2004-04-14, you wrote:
>On Wednesday 14 April 2004 08.32, Per Tunedal Casual wrote:
>> PGP-MIME is far better but unfortunately PGP-MIME signed mail is not
>> transparent to non-pgp users. They will be confused by the empty mail
>> with the two strange attachments (though readable in a texteditor).
>> Thus I cannot use PGP-MIME widely.
>Name one mailer except MSOE which also shows this behaviour. All other
>mailers I've come across properly implement MIME and can sensibly
>display MIME multipart messages with an unknown subtype. I have by now
>just given up on MSOE users: they want to live that way, so be it
>(There are very few exceptions to this rule - job applications is one
>example where it is vital for me that my messages are read :-/.
>The confusion for the user is exactly the same: it is a strange
>attachment in one case, and it is '----- BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE
>-----' at the top and a strange blurb at the bottom in the other case.
NO, PGP-MIME looks really strange in Outlook Express. You'd better try it!
I cannot give up the OE-users as they are the mainpart of my customers.
Thus I have to stick to inlined pgp-signing (doesn't always verify OK) or
switch to S-MIME (rather not!).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) - GPGrelay v0.94
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Gnupg-users