jerry at seibercom.net
Wed Feb 1 22:02:24 CET 2012
On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 14:40:23 -0500
Robert J. Hansen articulated:
> I liked hearing the "Gee, look at the time, gotta go" answer. It
> seemed to be the most honest.
> YMMV, and banks are definitely different beasts from voting
I used to get the "Gee" bit to when I asked for a raise. Anyhow, I am
willing to bet that most, if not all banking establishments do not
verify signed mail, or if they do they want S/MIME since their user
base is vastly Microsoft orientated and S/MIME is favored on that
An unverified signed document is about as useful as tits on a bull. I
receive from time to time a signed document on various forums that is
shown as bad by my MUA (claws-mail). Usually, it is just out of date.
Occasionally, I get a revoked one though. Again, it is usually due to
the PEBKC phenomenon. In any case, I have never considered the
signature to be of any importance in a mail forum environment. I know
that some users do, and that is their right. The only problem I have
is with those friggin "inliners" whose signature Spams up the page and
makes a "sig-delimiter" impotent. Then, of course, there are
those intellectually challenged who fail to trim out that superfluous
crap before replying to it.
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
More information about the Gnupg-users