GnuPG Clearsign vs. PGP/MIME Signing
sk at intertivity.com
Sun Jun 5 01:11:17 CEST 2005
That's this missing part. Thanks!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gnupg-users-bounces at gnupg.org
> [mailto:gnupg-users-bounces at gnupg.org] On Behalf Of David Shaw
> Sent: Sonntag, 5. Juni 2005 01:01
> To: gnupg-users at gnupg.org
> Subject: Re: GnuPG Clearsign vs. PGP/MIME Signing
> On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 10:42:51AM +0200, Kiefer, Sascha wrote:
> > Hmm.
> > I just implemented RFC2015 3 days ago.
> > The format of PGP/MIME described in that paper does not match the
> > format you are using. Your mails start with a Content-Type of
> > multipart/mixed and you declare The pgp data as
> attachments. But this
> > is not true. Maybe I'm missing something, or your messages not
> > pgp/smime encoded? I attached your mails (one signed, one
> > to this mail, so you can check to see what i mean.
> Possibly the confusion is that RFC-2015 was updated by
> RFC-3156. You should do things the 3156 way.
> Gnupg-users mailing list
> Gnupg-users at gnupg.org
More information about the Gnupg-users