On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 02:12:49PM -0400, Elie Rosenblum wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 06:11:51PM +0200, Oliver Kurth wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Does anyone else get this? > > > > [-- PGP output follows (current time: Tue Oct 22 18:10:26 2002) --] > > gpg: Signature made Tue Oct 22 17:49:23 2002 CEST using RSA key ID > > 4B7C223D > > gpg: BAD signature from "Elie Rosenblum <fnord@debian.org>" > > [-- End of PGP output --] > > Hmm. I'm using pgp2.rc in mutt. In my own mailer I get: > Good signature from user "Elie Rosenblum <fnord@debian.org>". > Signature made 2002/10/22 15:49 GMT using 2047-bit key, key ID 4B7C223D > > This is the same key with which I sign my uploads, and I've never had > a problem with those being accepted. But there certainly is a problem. I get the same error with gnupg from sid and from woody, using mutt in both cases. The others that get the error use mutt or Evolution. I got your key from wwwkeys.de.pgp.net, but the key from keyring.debian.org is the same. Are we talking about the same key? Your fingerprint seems to be: $ gpg --fingerprint 4B7C223D pub 2047R/4B7C223D 1997-04-28 Elie Rosenblum <fnord@debian.org> Key fingerprint = B5 D5 EA ED 77 ED 1D 24 21 F9 BF 8A 60 68 D6 34 uid Elie Rosenblum <erosenbl@nyx.net> gpg signing is not worth anything if we do not investigate this problem. Does anyone _not_ get 'BAD signature' for Elie's mails? Greetings, Oliver -- debian/rules http://zork.net/~nick/srom/
Attachment:
pgpqGJrqExuXj.pgp
Description: PGP signature