> However, it doesn't seem to meet their requirements. Here's the reply of > our partner : > "The file is first encrypted and then signed. Not encrypted and signed > in the same run."
It's possible that your partner has phrased things poorly. It may be your partner meant to say, "We want the file to be encrypted and then signed, not encrypted and signed in the same run." The way you are doing things, GnuPG will (in effect) combine encryption and signing into a single step. Some groups have policies that say this is a bad idea. For these people, you need to explicitly break it up into two steps: gpg --encrypt --recipient 'Your Recipient' filename gpg --sign --local-user 'Your Key' filename.gpg This _may_ be the problem. I make no guarantees. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
