> > I presume mutt needs multipart/signed. > > Sounds like a reasonable guess. I don't suppose you could send in a > message that has been mangled this way? It would make it easier to > test.
I'm attaching a tgz archive with both versions, most of the headers stripped that are not relevant to this discussion. I don't necessarily ask that mutt supports this form of broken email, but it would be nice to have a workaround. Chances are slim that our hoster will address the issue.
broken-pgp.tgz
Description: application/tar-gz
