PGP/MIME considered harmful for mobile

Ben McGinnes ben at
Sun Feb 27 08:44:26 CET 2011

On 27/02/11 3:28 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> If you look at the characteristics of the actual messages encrypted
> mail is very similar whether it's in-line or MIME.

Exactly, the encrypted output in both methods uses base-64 encoding.

> It's signed messages that make things interesting because the
> signature in a MIME message is actually (sort of) an attachment but
> also sort of not, which is why it confuses simple mail readers like
> Outlook Express.

Lots of things confuse Outlook Express.  As for attachments, at first
glance the body of a message appears to be an attachment to the
headers, which leads to all sorts of fun with munged mbox format
inboxes.  Or it did when I last had to pay attention to such things.


-------------- 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/20110227/36b6dbd3/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list