On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 08:01:15PM -0700, Charles Curley wrote:
> I suspect that mutt and gpg/pgp are doing everything right but that
> you are misinterpreting the results. Have you and your colleague read
This is a copy of terminal after entering message which was and encrypted, but
NOT SIGNED:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
i:Exit -:PrevPg <Space>:NextPg v:View Attachm. d:Del r:Reply j:Next ?:Help
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:44:40 +0100
From: Michal Kochanowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Michal Kochanowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: PGP lokalnie (e)
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i
Organization: Happy GNU/Linux Users
[-- PGP output follows (current time: wto 19 mar 2002 08:38:02 CET) --]
gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit ELG-E key, ID BF4EB9F4, created 2001-05-24
"Michal Kochanowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
[-- End of PGP output --]
[-- The following data is PGP/MIME encrypted --]
test
--
--= Michal [EMAIL PROTECTED] =--
--= finger me for PGP public key or visit http://michal.waw.pl/PGP =--
--==--==--==--==--==-- Vodka. Connecting people.--==--==--==--==--==--
A chodzenie po górach SSIE!!!
[-- End of PGP/MIME encrypted data --]
- PF- 653/663: Michal Kochanowicz PGP lokalnie (e)
-- (all)
PGP signature could NOT be verified.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please tell me what am I missinterpreting. Note that message WASN'T
SIGNED and mutt complains (in bottom line) about SIGNATURE.
> up in the The GNU Privacy Handbook (http://www.gnupg.org/docs.html)
> about validating public keys?
I've browsed through it and I didn't learn anything new. Pleas note that
when used form shell gpg says that everything is OK (as can be seen in
message part of above screenshot). It (of course) returns 0 exit code.
--
--= Michal [EMAIL PROTECTED] =--
--= finger me for PGP public key or visit http://michal.waw.pl/PGP =--
--==--==--==--==--==-- Vodka. Connecting people.--==--==--==--==--==--
A chodzenie po górach SSIE!!!
