On Thursday, October 17, 2002, at 04:05 PM, Levi Ramsey wrote: [...]
Nope, I like it when people use them. I can see, at a glance, that who I think wrote the message did in fact write the message. I'm not keen on forgers, nor reading their fake mails, so this is a nice thing to have. And, I hope, it gives people confidence when reading mail from me that I did in fact write it.GPG encryption is not needed. However, on a mailinglist which is (in theory) doing mission critical stuff, I don't think GPG sigs detract in any way.
Now, if sympa would stop rewriting mails and adding stuff, the gpg signatures would be really useful (not that this happens all the time, but enough to make it frustrating).
Of course, I choose not to sign my emails (partly because I don't do
anything approaching mission critical on this list), but I can certainly
see why Vincent (among others sign their emails.
=)
-- MandrakeSoft Security; http://www.mandrakesecure.net/ "lynx - source http://linsec.ca/vdanen.asc | gpg --import" {FE6F2AFD: 88D8 0D23 8D4B 3407 5BD7 66F9 2043 D0E5 FE6F 2AFD}
PGP.sig
Description: PGP signature
