Charakter, als sich in offenem
Gegensatz zu seiner Zeit zu befinden und zu sagen: Nein!
- Kurt Tucholsky
msg27241/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
msg27242/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
: no signed data
gpg: can't hash datafile: file open error
If those are pgp/mine it's sure that gpg can't verify anything.
David I know you use several keyrings. If I uncomment all keyring lines
in my options file I can verify any mail just fine.
Without those lines the gpg output shows that the sigs
begin David T-G quotation:
I tried this method, using my editor to write everything from the last
^From_ line down to the bottom of the folder out to a file, but couldn't
get gpg to do anything with it:
Argh. I forgot PGP/MIME. That method I said will only work with inline
sigs.
Score
Shawn --
...and then Shawn McMahon said...
%
% begin David T-G quotation:
%
% I tried this method, using my editor to write everything from the last
% ^From_ line down to the bottom of the folder out to a file, but couldn't
% get gpg to do anything with it:
%
% Argh. I forgot PGP/MIME
: can't hash datafile: file open error
%
% If those are pgp/mine it's sure that gpg can't verify anything.
Now I get what Shawn was doing. Thanks.
% David I know you use several keyrings. If I uncomment all keyring lines
% in my options file I can verify any mail just fine.
Interesting...
I have
--
The nice thing about Windows is - It does not just crash, it displays a
dialog box and lets you press 'OK' first.
(Arno Schaefer's .sig)
PGP-Key: http://www-stud.ims.uni-stuttgart.de/~tatgeml/public.key
. -- fortune cookie
(work) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
msg27266/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
/at/pobox/dot/com
2:348/610@fidonet; GnuPG key: 0x5C4839A5; Registered LiNUX User #93375
If the brain was so simple that we could understand it, we would
be so simple that we could not understand it (Lyall Watson)
msg27268/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
. -- fortune cookie
(work) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
msg27185/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
for one's principles
(play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie
(work) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
msg27186/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
the same, too.
--output and -o are equal.
Cheers, Rocco.
msg27187/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+20020413110926.A2737@Verdi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol=application/pgp-signature; boundary=TD8GDToEDw0WLGOL
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply
Hi,
* Thorsten Haude [EMAIL PROTECTED] [02-04-15 20:19]:
I cannot verify the first
And I cannot verify this one.
Thorsten
--
Das Briefgeheimnis sowie das Post- und Fernmeldegeheimnis sind unverletzlich.
- Grundgesetz, Artikel 10, Abs. 1
msg27201/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP
Thorsten Haude wrote:
* Thorsten Haude [EMAIL PROTECTED] [02-04-15 20:19]:
I cannot verify the first
And I cannot verify this one.
perhaps it's time (past time???) to take this discussion off list?
--
Will Yardley
input: william @ hq . newdream . net .
, so PGP or Mutt are not
involved, nor should be impacted, at least when all works well. Even
Mutt's feature to encode first dot when quoted-unreadabling is just to
be on the safe side: it should theorically not be necessary for
receiving unmodified mails, in a perfect world.
All this dot thing
your way is wrong
msg27204/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
he'd communicate with off-list could
possibly solve it?
--
Shawn McMahon| McMahon's Laws of Linux support:
http://www.eiv.com | 1) There's more than one way to do it
AIM: spmcmahonfedex, smcmahoneiv | 2) Somebody thinks your way is wrong
msg27205/pgp0.pgp
a general fuckup and our race is doomed.
msg27206/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
to be nearly the only one here to use PGP/MIME sigs,
and to *not* use QP encoding: why?
Well some are encoded QP. I know some basics about encryption,
so I wonder why I would want to change that? I let mutt decide
which character encoding to use.
Cheers, Rocco.
msg27209/pgp0.pgp
cannot verify the following IDs (only checked April):
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmm, checked them and both verify. What does your
$pgp_verify_command look like?
Cheers, Rocco.
msg27142/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
, Artikel 10, Abs. 1
msg27151/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
can view the
affected mails with? Didn't David mention he can't verify his
own, too?
I don't think that switching to 1.5.0 is the reason since it
works (with mbox) here.
Cheers, Rocco.
msg27154/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
bitte das Programm flea(1).
- - - Schnapp - - -
Still, a *lot* got broken when I switched to 1.5.0.
Thorsten
--
Wasn't the storming of the Bastille an act of terrorism?
Probably. Now it's a holiday.
- umarsyed
msg27155/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hi,
* Thorsten Haude [EMAIL PROTECTED] [02-04-14 23:06]:
I cannot verify this one. I can still verify my other mails.
Thorsten
--
I've been accused of vulgarity. I say that's bullshit.
- Mel Brooks
msg27158/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
and 1.5.0 (04/2002 only).
I can't verify with 1.3.28 _and_ 1.5.0:
+ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The two messages you former mentioned verify here. You spoke
about 4 mails including these two?
Cheers, Rocco.
msg27159/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
signature from ...) on the 325 PGP signed mails from April.
Their IDs are:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Note the last one is by David too. Don't know what's happening?
...taking more time to study the 4 mails...
Last minute before sending
= 1;
+ }
}
}
msg27164/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
PROTECTED]
- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
because I just can't. Sample output:
- - - Schnipp - - -
[-- PGP output follows (current time: Mon 15 Apr 2002 00:38:24 CEST) --]
gpg: Warnung: Sensible Daten könnten auf Platte ausgelagert werden.
gpg: Unterschrift vom Son 14 Apr 2002
Hi,
* Thorsten Haude [EMAIL PROTECTED] [02-04-15 00:41]:
I cannot verify (April only):
With neither 1.5.0 nor 1.3.27 (except for S/MIME of course).
Thorsten
--
Alles ist richtig, auch das Gegenteil.
- Kurt Tucholsky
msg27166/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hi,
* Aaron Schrab [EMAIL PROTECTED] [02-04-15 00:38]:
Add this one to the list I just can't verify. I cannot find any
suspicious dots here.
Thorsten
--
Death to all fanatics!
msg27167/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Tucholsky
Maybe use signatures in English in an English list?
Cheers, Rocco.
msg27169/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
verify OK those 2 mails, but can't verify 4 others
(gpg: BAD signature from ...) on the 325 PGP signed mails from April.
Their IDs are:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hey, that's one of mine and guess what... It verifies okay
here.
Last minute before sending: Well, I found what's happening, at least
a broken MTA involved.
--
Shawn McMahon| McMahon's Laws of Linux support:
http://www.eiv.com | 1) There's more than one way to do it
AIM: spmcmahonfedex, smcmahoneiv | 2) Somebody thinks your way is wrong
msg27173/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
* It's easier to fight for one's principles
(play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie
(work) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
msg27023/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
how can one make Mutt not to verify the Pgp-signature automatically?
I want to do it manually if at all.
-Hanspeter
On Apr 10 at 16:52, Hanspeter Roth spoke:
Hello,
how can one make Mutt not to verify the Pgp-signature automatically?
I want to do it manually if at all.
pgp_verify_sig
* On 2002.04.10, in [EMAIL PROTECTED],
* Hanspeter Roth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
how can one make Mutt not to verify the Pgp-signature automatically?
I want to do it manually if at all.
Putt into your muttrc file:
set pgp_verify_sig=no
macro index \Cv enter
--liOOAslEiF7prFVr
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE8tIEaWkhBtALlJZ0RAn7HAKC3y26UwUYSQgfXN3KIaR/61aKgzQCfZMlr
YW4bt4aRsiWWAGznw0VVp4s=
=i0cr
-END PGP
://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
msg26988/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wednesday, 10 April 2002, David T-G wrote:
% I would like to define a keystroke that fetches gpg keys for me from
% signed messages, like
%
% gpg --keyserver www.keyserver.net --recv-keys 0x$KEY
%
% But how can I get/define $KEY?
Why reinvent the wheel? Just use
but '0x'. You then
would have to type the key id manually.
2) You could - the complicated way - try some script in conjunction with
the display_filter variable to do what you want.
Your choice. ;-)
But I think you want to simply add the keyserver to your GnuPG config
file. For use with pgp you
/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
My first post! Jippie!
So, my question:
There seems to be quite some different ways to mark that a MIME part
should be processed by pgp/gpg, multipart/(signed/encrypted),
application/pgp, and some (e.g. kmail) relies on the body contents to
find out. Which is the 'correct' way?
--
Magnus
begin Magnus Therning quotation:
So, my question:
There seems to be quite some different ways to mark that a MIME part
should be processed by pgp/gpg, multipart/(signed/encrypted),
application/pgp, and some (e.g. kmail) relies on the body contents to
find out. Which is the 'correct' way
Magnus --
...and then Magnus Therning said...
%
% My first post! Jippie!
Welcome!
%
% So, my question:
% There seems to be quite some different ways to mark that a MIME part
% should be processed by pgp/gpg, multipart/(signed/encrypted),
Well, some of that is based on the PGP method itself
Hi all
I have just got GNUPG working with Mutt, and since I am still new to
Mutt and PGP I am very impressed.
However by default (my choice), I now sign all outgoing emails
(including this one I hope), I have increased the timeout threshold of
mutt remembering my secret key password so
Hi,
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [04/04/02 23:04:41] wrote:
I have just got GNUPG working with Mutt, and since I am still new to
Mutt and PGP I am very impressed.
Fine.
However by default (my choice), I now sign all outgoing emails
(including this one I hope), I have increased the timeout threshold
to
% Mutt and PGP I am very impressed.
Welcome! You have a delightful mountain of learning ahead of you :-)
%
% However by default (my choice), I now sign all outgoing emails
% (including this one I hope), I have increased the timeout threshold of
Yep; it was signed.
% mutt remembering my
Rocco --
...and then Rocco Rutte said...
%
[talking about PGP passwords and such]
%
% I type it every time because it's a security feature and I try to store
% passwords in my mind only. I do not even want to store it somewhere in
% memory and/or swap.
Good idea on how to store; better safe
know -- I'd be interested too. :-)
--
Jussi Ekholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Jesus is on opium, Jesus needs a fix,
http://erppimaa.cjb.net/~ekhowl/ | Singing love, brother love,
ekh @ IRCNet | Singing love, brother love...
msg26428/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
* tim lupfer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-27 22:06:08 -0600]:
* thus spaketh Sven Guckes (Mar 28 at 03:37AM):
but - is there a way I can just *hide*
the pgp sig *completely* from view?
mutt reads mail--stripping pgp sigs is the job of procmail or the
like -- sorry, couldn't resist :P
I'll have to find out why the
first pattern did not work...
...maybe you'll see clearer, if you look at the pgp attachment in a
signed mail (or after reading chapter 8 in the Mutt-GnuPG-PGP-HOWTO).
HTH,
Thomas
--
Thomas Hümmler * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.huemmler.de
Actually, I've
in there.
To determine what it is, set your display-filter to some cat command that
sends the output to a file. Then you can see just what filter-message
sees.
msg26353/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mar 28, Jeremy Blosser [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
Is filter-message seeing the message after the attachment color is applied?
s/filter-message/display-filter
must not mail before 9am.
msg26355/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 07:53:12AM +0100, Sven Guckes wrote:
* Jeremy Blosser [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-28 03:39]:
On Mar 28, Sven Guckes [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
[-- Attachment #2 --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0.2K --]
that is, mutts still
to strip them? When is it that
you want them to still be there?
msg26373/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
now, here's the situation:
when the current message has a pgp sig and pgp_verify_sig is set
the mutt will show an error message iwhich is something like this:
[-- PGP output follows (current time: Thu Mar 28 03:29:50 2002) --]
[-- End of PGP output --]
[-- The following data is signed
begin quoting what Sven Guckes said on Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 03:37:11AM +0100:
but - is there a way I can just *hide*
the pgp sig *completely* from view?
Do you still want to verify the sigs, or not?
If not, you could strip them with procmail.
msg26333/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP
On Mar 28, Sven Guckes [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
[-- Attachment #2 --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0.2K --]
[-- application/pgp-signature is unsupported (use 'v' to view this part) --]
that is, mutts still shows the pgp sig (like an extra attachment
* thus spaketh Sven Guckes (Mar 28 at 03:37AM):
but - is there a way I can just *hide*
the pgp sig *completely* from view?
mutt reads mail--stripping pgp sigs is the job of procmail or the
like -- sorry, couldn't resist :P
--
timothy lupfer
http://sadlittleboy.com
' Park
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
An honest tale speeds best being plainly told.
-- William Shakespeare, Henry VI
--VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see
* Jeremy Blosser [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-28 03:39]:
On Mar 28, Sven Guckes [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
[-- Attachment #2 --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0.2K --]
that is, mutts still shows the pgp sig (like an extra attachment).
is there a way I can
...
...maybe you'll see clearer, if you look at the pgp attachment in a
signed mail (or after reading chapter 8 in the Mutt-GnuPG-PGP-HOWTO).
HTH,
Thomas
--
Thomas Hümmler * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.huemmler.de
David T-G [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...and then Shawn McMahon said...
If you do that, make sure you local-sign, not sign for export. The latter
would be a big no-no. The gpg and pgp documention goes into these subjects
in depth, IIRC.
We even had that whole discussion here a while back
On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 01:17:10PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One more question popped in my mind; when GnuPG automagicly fetches
a key of some person and verifies it, it goes to the key list (I mean,
that I can check it out with 'gpg --list-keys'). Does this mean, that
it is signed? If
Jussi --
...and then Jussi Ekholm said...
%
% David T-G [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
%
% ...and then Shawn McMahon said...
% If you do that, make sure you local-sign, not sign for export. The latter
% would be a big no-no. The gpg and pgp documention goes into these subjects
...
%
% One more
24-Mar-02 at 22:37, Rob 'Feztaa' Park ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
Your name just sounds so feminine. We seem to get a lot of that here,
don't we? ;)
I don't know that I can let you get away with that. Said in the correct accent
- in fact, one of German, Switzerdutch, and most Scandinavian
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 09:10:11AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In and English accent (particularly Canadian/American) it /may/ sound
feminine... but you should never assume that just because in your phonetics, a
name sounds feminine, that it is. Indeed, never assume at all that you can
* Jussi Ekholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-24 21:09:42 +0200]:
Rob 'Feztaa' Park [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alas! Jussi Ekholm spake thus:
But yeah - what is so bad in PGP signed mails in mailing lists?
There is nothing wrong -- the people who say it is wrong are simply
heretics.
Oh, you
míriel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]| o menel aglar elenath! Na-chaered palan-díriel
ekh @ IRCNet | o galadhremmin ennorath, Fanuilos le linnathon
http://ekhowl.goa-head.org | nef aear, sí nef aearon
msg26050/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
be a big no-no. The gpg and pgp documention goes into these subjects
% in depth, IIRC.
We even had that whole discussion here a while back. Rob, when was that?
*grin*
:-D
--
David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles
(play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up
the amil.
Myxie amil/mail
Myxie muches/munches tat/that htere/there
HippieGuy heheh
HippieGuy problems? :)
* Myxie needs an ircii addon that pipes teh command line through ispell :)
-- Seen on #Debian
--DiL7RhKs8rK9YGuF
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
First love is only a little foolishness and a lot of curiosity, no really
self-respecting woman would take advantage of it.
-- George Bernard Shaw, John Bull's Other Island
--SNIs70sCzqvszXB4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
* thus spaketh Rob 'Feztaa' Park (Mar 25 at 12:31PM):
I don't know that I can let you get away with that. Said in the
correct accent - in fact, one of German, Switzerdutch, and most
Scandinavian accents, Jussi sounds reasonably masculine to me.
Well, it sounds an awful lot like Jessy to me,
for one's principles
(play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie
(work) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
msg26077/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
]
--
I'm glad I'm not bisexual. I couldn't stand being rejected by men
as well as women.
-- Bernard Manning
msg26083/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie
(work) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
msg26087/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Dixon. Canadian race car
driver Jessy Cohoon.
msg26088/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
, the intent was not to start a flamewar here, or suggest
that you stop signing your mails, but simply to present another opinion
to the original poster.
I'd just like to hear, why signing PGP for mails going to mailing lists
is not so wanted thing to do? And yes, I agree 100% - let's not start a
flamewar
* Jussi Ekholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-24 13:01:00 +0200]:
I'd just like to hear, why signing PGP for mails going to mailing lists
is not so wanted thing to do? And yes, I agree 100% - let's not start a
flamewar or anything. The whole thing is, that I'm a newbie to the whole
Pretty Good
Nicolas Rachinsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Jussi Ekholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-24 13:01:00 +0200]:
But yeah - what is so bad in PGP signed mails in mailing lists?
If you didn't want to start a flamewar, I'm fear, you asked the wrong
question ;-)
Well, that wasn't my intention at all
Alas! Jussi Ekholm spake thus:
But yeah - what is so bad in PGP signed mails in mailing lists?
There is nothing wrong -- the people who say it is wrong are simply
heretics.
Oh, you _didn't_ want to start a flamewar? Oops... ;)
--
Rob 'Feztaa' Park
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
BOFH excuse #178:
Short
Rob 'Feztaa' Park [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alas! Jussi Ekholm spake thus:
But yeah - what is so bad in PGP signed mails in mailing lists?
There is nothing wrong -- the people who say it is wrong are simply
heretics.
Oh, you _didn't_ want to start a flamewar? Oops... ;)
LOL! Well, maybe
begin quoting what Jussi Ekholm said on Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 09:09:42PM +0200:
Ah well, I've decided not to use signed mails in mailing lists if
there isn't any reason for me to do it. What matters, is, that PGP
works with my Mutt - whole other thing is, if I use it... ;-)
The same reasons
Moin,
* Shawn McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [02-03-24 20:14]:
The same reasons for doing so in private mail apply to lists.
The same reasons for not doing so in lists apply to private mail.
There are several things different between broadcasts and
point-to-point connection, as you sure know.
Shawn McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The same reasons for doing so in private mail apply to lists.
The same reasons for not doing so in lists apply to private mail.
Yes, I know. At least this proves, that I managed to upset people
with my child walk of PGP signatures (I agree, I should've
people who would benefit from
exposure to cryptographic signatures.
Also, there's a longer distribution channel, and thus more opportunities
for forgery.
So, you're right; there's MORE reason to sign in lists than in private
mail. Thanks for the correction.
msg25986/pgp0.pgp
Description
begin quoting what Jussi Ekholm said on Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 09:31:06PM +0200:
Yes, I know. At least this proves, that I managed to upset people
with my child walk of PGP signatures (I agree, I should've selected
more appropriate place for testing it for the first time); or would
I get
Hi,
* Shawn McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [02-03-24 20:34]:
begin quoting what Thorsten Haude said on Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 08:26:53PM +0100:
There are several things different between broadcasts and
point-to-point connection, as you sure know.
Yes. For instance, there are far more people who
to clarify it or apologize for it.
I went back over it and couldn't see anything except matter-of-factly-presented
opinions, and one personal note of thanks. To what exactly did you object
as being a flame?
msg25990/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Jussi Ekholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I didn't say I'm not going to use it. I will, that's for sure.
Nah, on second thought I don't think I ever will. In fact, I can't stand
the thought of having to sign all my messages! I'm deleting gnupg as we
speak!
Oh yeah, and I hate everybody on
* Jussi Ekholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-24 13:53:18 -0700]:
Jussi Ekholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I didn't say I'm not going to use it. I will, that's for sure.
Nah, on second thought I don't think I ever will. In fact, I can't stand
the thought of having to sign all my messages!
begin quoting what Jussi Ekholm said on Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 01:53:18PM -0700:
So long, suckers.
You're an evil bastard, Fezta. :-)
msg26007/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
if I'm in my right mind. Then it passes off and I'm
as intelligent as ever.
-- Samuel Beckett, Endgame
msg26008/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
but a practising theorist?
-- Obi-Wan Kenobi
--9ADF8FXzFeE7X4jE
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE8nkQ8PTh2iSBKeccRAoiiAJ9ykI
Shawn McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jussi Ekholm said on Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 09:31:06PM +0200:
Yes, I know. At least this proves, that I managed to upset people
with my child walk of PGP signatures (I agree, I should've selected
more appropriate place for testing it for the first time
| nef aear, sí nef aearon
msg26024/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
://ekhowl.goa-head.org | nef aear, sí nef aearon
msg26026/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
that Things go better with Coke.
--FCuugMFkClbJLl1L
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE8nmqVPTh2iSBKeccRAov6AJ9VGXyzxUJjnpuHUQI6ec7TFxzA5ACffgj6
301 - 400 of 1369 matches
Mail list logo
