[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Signatures (was Re: typewriter function for an impact printer?)



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/24/08 13:07, Florian Kulzer wrote:
[snip]
> 
> It seems to me that it is an inherent problem with inline signing:
> Google for "pgp dash escaping" or "pgp trailing whitespace" or
> something like that.
> 
> When I get your messages, I also see the mutilated sig dash "- --" until
> I tell mutt to verify your signature. As part of the verification
> process the leading "- " is removed, so it appears to be some sort of
> escape sequence. I see the same behavior if I save the raw message to
> disk and run gpg manually on it. However, this does not restore the
> proper signature separator because the trailing space remains missing.
> 
> I found that I can add trailing spaces on any line of your message and
> it still validates, so there appears to be a convention to strip off
> trailing whitespace before checking the validity of the signature. (I
> have not read the relevant RFCs, but my guess would be that this is done
> to accommodate for the mangling of line endings that might happen with
> various MUAs on different operating systems.) This seems to make it
> impossible to have the proper dash-dash-space signature delimiter in an
> inline-signed message, unless there is a special escape sequence for
> that. (If there is indeed one then Thunderbird does not seem to know
> anything about it.)
> 
> I think this is one of the reasons why inline signatures have been
> depreciated for quite a while; why not use PGP/MIME detached signatures
> instead?

Interesting.  I'll research that.

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

"(Women are) like compilers.  They take simple statements and
make them into big productions."
Pitr Dubovitch
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHwew/S9HxQb37XmcRAliYAKDsiAHojC/nSi3ldSTi6TKcsb6JggCgzn5F
bIRpLzU+nVnlpsL/iE4w+NE=
=J6St
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Reply to: