PGP/MIME considered harmful for mobile

Ben McGinnes ben at
Sun Feb 27 03:53:46 CET 2011

On 27/02/11 1:24 PM, Jameson Rollins wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 21:02:08 -0500, Avi < at> wrote:
>> Why? Inline is simple and effective. I'm curious as to why you
>> feel MIME is so much better.

Thanks for the link.

I'd only add that in-line is fine for encrypting messages since all
the data in-line signing may whinge about (e.g. some UTF-8 characters)
would be safely tucked away inside the encrypted block.  Personally I
only use in-line signing in a few places (or with a few correspondents)
where I've got no choice.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 227 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20110227/d399b331/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list