PGP/MIME considered harmful for mobile

Grant Olson kgo at
Mon Feb 28 04:59:39 CET 2011

On 02/27/2011 10:22 PM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 28/02/11 2:02 PM, David Shaw wrote:
>> I'm not at all surprised that you had those results.  A limited
>> subset of people have support for OpenPGP signatures.  A limited
>> subset of those people actually verify signatures.  A limited subset
>> of those people actually pay attention to what those signatures say.
> And a limited subset of those will actually speak up.  ;)

Especially on a list where many people self-identify as newbies.

I've been toying with the idea of expiring my key and seeing how long it
takes for anyone to notice.  In fact, I've just decided I will do this
sometime in the next year.  It'll be interesting to see how long it
takes people to notice even after I've announced my intentions.

If anyone remembers this conversation when I do this, please let me know
my key is expired off-list, so we can collect more data than the first


"Look around! Can you construct some sort of rudimentary lathe?"

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 565 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20110227/bc060318/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list