On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 08:52:55AM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote: > Andreas Janssen <andreas.janssen@bigfoot.com> writes: > > > As far as I know evolution does not support the old (and very common) > > inline PGP/GPG signatures. Instead it only supports attatched GPG/PGP > > signatures (PGP/MIME). > > Inline PGP is fading from popularity, broken clients be damned. > > > The problem is that many other MUAs only support inline signatures, > > but not PGP/MIME, and some need additional software to support > > PGP/MIME (like aegypten for kmail). Check ix 03/2004 for an overview > > on PGP support in common MUAs. > > And some clients are so broken that they don't even show MIME messages > correctly (OE...) It's worse than that (he's dead, Jim)... My godfather's OE claims that messages with attached signatures are "unsafe", and blocks access to them entirely. It won't even let him read the text of the message. And today I received a bounce from someone's misconfigured Windoze system that they'd apparently been receiving debian-user mail on; Norton Antivirus had rejected one of my posts to the list because it had an "unsafe attachment", ie. the PGP signature. I can't help wondering if this is some kind of conspiracy to deter people from using encryption-based systems... -- Pigeon Be kind to pigeons Get my GPG key here: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x21C61F7F
Attachment:
pgp4cn1HrpXfB.pgp
Description: PGP signature