Joe(theWordy)Philbrook wrote: > My message does not consist of an text/sig pair of attachments. Yet it > too has an GPG signature embedded with the text in the actual message > body. It also has an embedded instruction as to which pgp server my > public key can be found. > > While I [obviously] prefer the embedded method over what I call a > detached sig. Both are examples of using gpg (or pgp) And a good clue > that the sender wants it to be possible to verify that was received was > in fact exactly what he or she sent. And that he or she did actually send > them. > > One reason I prefer to use the embedded ascii form is it made it easy > for me to start the signing process from my editor instead of "having" > to depend on my mail client for it. > > Why so many seam to prefer the detached signature method, I do not know??? There's a very good review of the advantages and disadvantages of the two methods, along with how to set up GPG with various mail clients, at http://lwn.net/Articles/93640/ . In particular, Evolution will only understand MIME (apparently: I've never got on with the program). James. -- E-mail address: james | Which do you consider was the stronger swimmer, @westexe.demon.co.uk | (a) The Spanish Armadillo, | (b) The Great Seal? | -- '1066 and All That'
