https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=406269
--- Comment #4 from Albert Astals Cid <aa...@kde.org> --- (In reply to Nate Graham from comment #3) > Not an expert on this stuff so let me ask some questions: > > - What exactly do you mean by "shitty broken signatures?" Lots of fields are missing. > - Are shitty broken signatures valid? Depends on what you mean by valid :D The existing contents are not wrong, they just miss lots of fields that make them quite shitty and not very useful. > Can they be legitimately used for any purpose? Most probably not. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
