Re: [tlug] Yet Another PGP question

[Ulrich Plate <plate@example.com>]

Stuart Bouyer wrote:

> I think this has to do with how your email client handles pgp
> attachments. I'm using evolution and have no problem authenticating
> signatures made with evolution, slypheed, mutt, but I always get BAD
> signature returns from kmail.

That leads straight back to the discussion about ASCII armoured PGP as
opposed to the PGP/MIME variant that we had a few weeks ago.

> It appears that evolution doesn't understand this format of
> encoding/seperation of message parts. If I save the email to a file
> and run gpg --verify on it manually it always shows good signature.

I haven't found a client that does both. Sylpheed at least has an option
of being able to *send* both formats, but none of the clients I've
checked (KMail, Evolution, Sylpheed) can read and verify both.

That said, I have a renewed interest in KMail since I heard about this
weird Ägypten/SPHINX project they just finished. Sponsored by the German
federal police, a result is that both PGP/MIME (RFC3156) *and* S/MIME
support appear to be available in CVS now. These are exciting times.

> Hope this is helpful
> 
> Stu

Sorry I misspelled your name. If it is of any importance to you, your
signature now looks good in both Sylpheed and Evolution... :-)

Cheers
Ulrich Plate

Attachment: pgp00014.pgp
Description: PGP signature