distributing ones public key (email)

[Ingo Klöcker]

On Saturday 23 January 2010, Chris De Young wrote:
> Sven Radde wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Mark H. Wood schrieb:
> >> I too would like to find some way to get the word
> >> out about what it is and why my correspondent might find it
> >> desirable.
> >
> > What about inline signatures when emailing people that do not yet
> > use OpenPGP?
>
> Personally, and this is just my opinion, I don't care for this
> approach (I have considered it) for a couple of reasons. One, it may
> encourage use of inline signatures in general, which (IMO) is bad,
> and two, it makes the message itself a bit harder to read. Getting
> the word out in a way that's annoying to your correspondents is
> probably not going to have the desired effect. :-)

Another serious problem of inline signatures is that they are likely to 
break when the recipient includes a full quote of the signed message in 
his reply (which is what basically everybody using Outlook, Lotus 
Notes, etc., does). Those bad signatures in the replies will 
desensitize those that use a mail client capable of verifying the 
signatures.


Regards,
Ingo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20100124/d709ba68/attachment.pgp>