On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 02:37:56PM +0200, Alexander Dalloz wrote: > Am Di, den 27.04.2004 schrieb Betti Ann & Preston Smith um 13:19: > > > Now if we could only get users to dispense with those darn signature.asc > > files. I get tens of these each day especially from this list > > > > Preston > > Hi, > > if your mail client does not follow/support standards, then you > certainly should think about exchanging it. Or contact the support of > the programming company. > > For serious, your mail header shows up > > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.0.6 > > as MUA, and I can't say how good or bad that client is in supporting > standards. End of March I did initialize a thread with subject "GPG > signatures and list mail" with quite some responses. the conclusion - > not only by me - was, that it's a client side problem, if it does not > handle signed mails proper. Typically those "problems" arise on > Windows[tm] platforms. > > GPG/PGP signed messages are a feature and no bug ;) > > Alexander gpg signed messages are sent as attachments by default in mutt. i can understand signing a message to the list with gpg to insure that your messages are verified they are sent from you. however, i don't think anyone cares unless it's a list or fedora package update notice - and they don't sign those either. i setup gpg once with mutt, but nobody ever used it or sent me any gpg encrypted messages and i found it worthless and a waste of time typing in the password string. there is also the isssue of compatibility between gpg and different versions of ms windows pgp clients. perhaps in our near future, if things go the way the should, your email will be verified that it is sent from you on the server and you won't have to worry about it. however, that would also prevent you from sending mail from your home pc running Linux if no reverse dns or mx record is provided for your ip address. you would be forced to register or use an approved smtp server to send mail. jay
