Confused about signing inline vs siging with attached signature.

[Erik Lotspeich]

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

Hi Steven,

I use the OpenPGP method (inline signatures) instead of PGP/MIME
(detached signatures) for exactly this reason.  It seems to be a common
problem that Outlook Express has trouble processing PGP/MIME e-mails.

I only use PGP/MIME when I need to send the message encrypted and I need
to send encrypted file attachments that I haven't previously encrypted
independently of e-mail.

Basically, nobody should be using Outlook Express -- it is a horrible
e-mail program with dozens of design flaws.

I would recommend to your friend that he consider Office Outlook.
Office Outlook shares nothing with Outlook Express (except for the
"Outlook" name) and is tremendous improvement.  Maybe your friend would
consider Thunderbird with Enigmail?

Regards

Erik

Steven W. Orr wrote:
> I decided to try sending my email with a signature attached instead of using
> an inline signature. Now my friend with Outlook Express is telling me that the
> message body is blank and that in order for him to see the message, he now has
> to open the text attachment. (He is not verifying the signature.) I'm using
> gpg2/Thunderbird/Enigmail and I sent a message to an address which then
> forwards back to me. Here's the structure I see when it comes back:
> 
> From: "Steven W. Orr" <me>
> Organization: SysLang
> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> To: linus at tivoli.mv.com
> Subject: 2nd shot at testing the
> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
> OpenPGP: id=F0BE3724;
> 	url=http://steveo.syslang.net/steveo-pubkey.asc
> X-GPG-PUBLIC_KEY: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xF0BE3724
> X-GPG-FINGRPRINT: 5E2A 0119 8E98 730A 87DF  205C 4485 72E1 F0BE 3724
> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
>  protocol="application/pgp-signature";
>  boundary="------------enig3D16DCFA59224E3B4529154E"
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
> 	version=3.2.5 country=US US **
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on saturn.syslang.net
> 
> This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
> --------------enig3D16DCFA59224E3B4529154E
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> EFS Emergency Farding System
> 
> --=20
> Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies like a banana. Stranger things have=
>   .0.
> happened but none stranger than this. Does your driver's license say Orga=
> n ..0
> Donor?Black holes are where God divided by zero. Listen to me! We are all=
> - 000
> individuals! What if this weren't a hypothetical question?
> steveo at syslang.net
> 
> 
> --------------enig3D16DCFA59224E3B4529154E
> Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
> Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAkqOq5AACgkQRIVy4fC+NyQCSgCdGoPfFC8XP1zbLI6E/trYSaXK
> DK0AniX4K8dxp3L3FPvMUAEqKknifvMI
> =D4Y4
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> --------------enig3D16DCFA59224E3B4529154E--
> 
> Should I not be using the MIME signature or is there something he should
> change at his end (besides OE), or is this question something that is not gpg2
> related in the first place?
> 
> TIA
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gnupg-users mailing list
> Gnupg-users at gnupg.org
> http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkqOtuQACgkQY21D/n6bGweqtQCfd6dGX5vG8NG5yPADffWWnE0z
2ksAoL2mhN8rWijcezQiTrHnN1thCNaL
=PAPw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----