Re: About PGP signatures
Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com writes: Request: I'd like a list of clients supporting RFC 2015 attachments and the plugins necessary to support this. Of particular interest: All Windows-based clients which support MIME only by translation at gateways (for example, Lotus Notes, and probably MS-Exchange-based solutions) cannot implement RFC 2015 since it's a MIME application. -- Florian Weimer[EMAIL PROTECTED] University of Stuttgart http://cert.uni-stuttgart.de/ RUS-CERT +49-711-685-5973/fax +49-711-685-5898
Re: About PGP signatures
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 04:36:33PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com writes: Request: I'd like a list of clients supporting RFC 2015 attachments and the plugins necessary to support this. Of particular interest: All Windows-based clients which support MIME only by translation at gateways (for example, Lotus Notes, and probably MS-Exchange-based solutions) cannot implement RFC 2015 since it's a MIME application. bummer. (heh, heh.) -- DEBIAN NEWBIE TIP #25 from Will Trillich [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Did you know you have MORE THAN ONE CONSOLE to use? There's six, by default: try Control-Alt-F6 to see console six, Ctl-Alt-F3 for console 3, and so forth. (If you don't use the X window display system, you don't need to include the control key.) Each console can have its own login, running its own jobs. Very handy! Also see http://newbieDoc.sourceForge.net/ ...
Re: About PGP signatures
On 24 May 2001 11:12:27, Craig wrote: FWIW, I'm using Evolution 0.10, and I have no problem reading PGP signatures from mutt users. I am using mhn/exmh and have no problems with mutt PGP sigs. I had been unaware that any MUA had problems with mutt sigs. -- Paul T. Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] -currently seeking employment-
Re: About PGP signatures
On Wed, 23 May 2001 19:57:17 -0400, Noah L. Meyerhans [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Noah Supporting RFCs is fine and should be encouraged, but from what Noah I've seen there is not another mail reader in existance that can Noah verify mutt's attached signatures. Just to add to the list, the CVS version of Gnus handles PGP/MIME as well. john.
Re: About PGP signatures
Noah Supporting RFCs is fine and should be encouraged, but from what Noah I've seen there is not another mail reader in existance that can Noah verify mutt's attached signatures. john Just to add to the list, the CVS version of Gnus handles PGP/MIME as john well. I thoght that Gnus itself doesn't support PGP at all. It needs Mailcrypt for PGP. And mailcrypt seems to support only embeded sigs. Or am I wrong? -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- | Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)| | GnuPG 1024D/323BDEE6 D7F7 561E 4C1D 8A15 8E80 E4AE BE1A 53EB 323B DEE6 | | AGAVA Software Company (http://www.agava.com/) | -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: About PGP signatures
On 24 May 2001 14:57:12 +0400, Ilya Martynov [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Ilya I thoght that Gnus itself doesn't support PGP at all. It needs Ilya Mailcrypt for PGP. And mailcrypt seems to support only embeded Ilya sigs. Or am I wrong? You're wrong. 8^)= The version of Gnus in CVS (Oort Gnus) comes with a file called gpg.el, which adds the ability to sign, verify, encrypt and decrypt mail (and I guess news, tho I never checked) in the MIME-attached format. I was using it for a bit, then I fell back to 5.8.8 when I ran out of time to keep up to date on the development. I don't know if gpg.el will work with the current release version of Gnus, but it may be worth a look. john.
Re: About PGP signatures
At 01:59 24.05.2001, you wrote: elsewhere, I don't think anything else can verify mutt's attached PGP/MIME signatures. Bad luck, but Eudora with PGP installed can. It won't even open the attachment without getting the key from a keyserver or already knowing it. Never underestimate Windoze as long as there are still non-M$ programs running under it. Volker -- Volker Gerstenkorn Aus Lübeck kommt nicht nur Marzipan... pgpzCHupHsTcE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About PGP signatures
on Wed, May 23, 2001 at 07:57:17PM -0400, Noah L. Meyerhans ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 03:43:47PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote: get a real mail client that supports RFCs. the relevant RFC is 2015 i recommend mutt Supporting RFCs is fine and should be encouraged, Note that RFC 2015 is a draft standard, it's not officially adopted by IETF. It is supported by a variety of clients, however. I've researched this issue several times as I'm one of the people who signs messages. Rant in progress. Note also that the authors of RFC 2015 and mutt see to have more than a passing familiarity with one another. but from what I've seen there is not another mail reader in existence that can verify mutt's attached signatures. Not true, as noted by others. Request: I'd like a list of clients supporting RFC 2015 attachments and the plugins necessary to support this. Of particular interest: - AOL - dtmail - Eudora for Legacy MS Windows and Mac. - Forte Agent - Juno - Lotus Notes - MS Internet Mail Service - MS Outlook - MS Outlook Express - Netscape 3.x / 4.x - Novell GroupWise - Pegasus Mail for Win32 - Turnpike Anyone having specific information on any of these clients please mail me off-list. I wrestled with this for a very very long time when switching to mutt. I've read the mutt developers' reasons for why inline sigs are bad, but when doing things the right way breaks things for everybody else, that's a bad situation. Not if it forces everyone else to consider adding RFC 2015 capabilities to their mail client. Signing and encryption are useful technologies (though not panaceas). The should be encouraged. I know mutt people just come back and say well everybody else is broken, but that argument just doesn't hold weight with me. Maybe mutt needs to wait until the rest of the world catches up to it, or, if the world has no intention of ever catching up to it, maybe the RFC needs rethinking. My philosophy: - You are responsible for verifying that I am the sender of a message purporting to come from me, and that the messages are intact. - GPG signatures area technical tool providing a level of assurance that this. - I sign all mail. - The standard is open. It's not officially accepted, but there's working code and a rough consensus. That works for me. I'm prepared to let the rest of the world reconsider its complacency. Cheers. -- Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.comhttp://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of Gestalt don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org Disclaimer: http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ pgpsxuENr40Yp.pgp Description: PGP signature
About PGP signatures
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I noticed that there are several members PGP-signing their postings. However, the signature is MIME-formatted and appears as an attachment in my mail client, Netscape Messenger. Because there is no built-in PGP function, I am forced to copy/paste the message to TkPGP to verify it. *But* the signature is separated from the message; so, how do I actually verify the message? Eddy -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7C7I352xca/NTIl8RAlzKAJ9ksgQPsY62hjiUv0h3b00HD489DgCgmEfX lfPL/ai7JZ3M6Uof7+Qe6pY= =ajbt -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: About PGP signatures
get a real mail client that supports RFCs. the relevant RFC is 2015 i reccommend mutt On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 01:51:18PM +0100, Eddy Young wrote: Hi, I noticed that there are several members PGP-signing their postings. However, the signature is MIME-formatted and appears as an attachment in my mail client, Netscape Messenger. Because there is no built-in PGP function, I am forced to copy/paste the message to TkPGP to verify it. *But* the signature is separated from the message; so, how do I actually verify the message? Eddy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/ pgpfd297GRyUy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About PGP signatures
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 03:43:47PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote: get a real mail client that supports RFCs. the relevant RFC is 2015 i reccommend mutt Supporting RFCs is fine and should be encouraged, but from what I've seen there is not another mail reader in existance that can verify mutt's attached signatures. I wrestled with this for a very very long time when switching to mutt. I've read the mutt developers' reasons for why inline sigs are bad, but when doing things the right way breaks things for everybody else, that's a bad situation. I know mutt people just come back and say well everybody else is broken, but that argument just doesn't hold weight with me. Maybe mutt needs to wait until the rest of the world catches up to it, or, if the world has no intention of ever catching up to it, maybe the RFC needs rethinking. noah -- ___ | Web: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/ | PGP Public Key: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/mail.html pgpVvSsVtPEiy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About PGP signatures
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 01:51:18PM +0100, Eddy Young wrote: copy/paste the message to TkPGP to verify it. *But* the signature is separated from the message; so, how do I actually verify the message? What you're supposed to be able to do is save the attached signature to a file (say 'foo.sign') and the signed message to another file (say 'foo.asc'). Then you should be able to run 'gpg --verify foo.sign foo.asc'. Let me know if that works, though, because as I've said elsewhere, I don't think anything else can verify mutt's attached PGP/MIME signatures. noah -- ___ | Web: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/ | PGP Public Key: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/mail.html pgp1v1KxtsRax.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About PGP signatures
I noticed that there are several members PGP-signing their postings. However, the signature is MIME-formatted and appears as an attachment in my mail client, Netscape Messenger. Because there is no built-in PGP function, I am forced to copy/paste the message to TkPGP to verify it. *But* the signature is separated from the message; so, how do I actually verify the message? [0]rtfm. /ben [0] http://www.gnupg.org/gph/en/manual.html#AEN161 -- |_|_ | _ _ |_ PGP public key: http://www.wilykit.com/wilykit.key |_) . |_)|(_|(_ |\ Never rub another man's rhubarb. -- Joker
Re: About PGP signatures
On 23 May 2001 19:57:17 -0400, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: Supporting RFCs is fine and should be encouraged, but from what I've seen there is not another mail reader in existance that can verify mutt's attached signatures. FWIW, I'm using Evolution 0.10, and I have no problem reading PGP signatures from mutt users. Craig -- Craig Holyoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.uq.net.au/craigh/
