sign encrypted emails
peter at digitalbrains.com
Mon Jan 6 11:48:24 CET 2014
On 06/01/14 01:51, Hauke Laging wrote:
> Let me guess: Modifying the mail client so that it automatically removes
> the word "not" would be illegitimate because for some strange reason
> that would be "solving social problems by technical means"...
I guess it boils down to the point that I just don't see a use case.
I believe there are two scenario's you're treating:
- You wish to give significance to a mail being encrypted; this, for you,
changes the context of the contents. I disagree; I'd rather see it context-free
- You wish to catch noobs in the act when they forget to encrypt. I think secure
communications with noobs is impossible, so it doesn't help to plug a single
hole in the sieve.
The result is that I see no application for what you describe. At to that the
fact I find it a rather ugly kludge to sign a single message twice instead of
keeping all authenticated data inside the one signature, and you've lost me.
So I guess this discussion is indeed pretty much done.
 Hmmm, maybe we should define a formal e-mail language ;)
 I'm using noobs rather broadly here, since I think it takes a lot of
attention and rigour to secure communications.
I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail.
You can send me encrypted mail if you want some privacy.
My key is available at <http://digitalbrains.com/2012/openpgp-key-peter>
More information about the Gnupg-users