-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Patrick Brunschwig wrote: > Ludwig Hügelschäfer wrote: >> Hi, > >> Malte Gell wrote on 08.12.2006 14:19 Uhr: > >>> Hm, GnuPG 1.4.5 (unpatched)/KMail 1.8.2 reports invalid signed >>> message... Maybe my gpg.conf is messed or is this due to changes in >>> gpg >>>> 1.4.5? Thanx. >> Enigmail didn't even indicate a signed message :-(( > > True yes. I have to find out why ...
Interesting ... I found that Werner's mails are PGP/MIME signed, with micalg=sha1 However, according to RFC 3156, this is not valid, the parameter would have to be as follows, and thus it's not recognized as valid by Enigmail: micalg=pgp-sha1 Is there a new version of the RFC that I'm not aware of, or is it just a bug of Werner's mail client? In general, is it a good idea to interpret the RFC so strictly for this, or is it "better" to be a bit more relaxed? - -Patrick -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQEVAwUBRXrPJHcOpHodsOiwAQKWdQf6A16HoCGb1kNNAa31RGJK0J6mSxB61Khn 4A5Ko9wPUuAegznBToYT+b/ePlx5Cz7Zz2BKaQ1nKN9sxPRwEKWk8Fzjb1+9xb2A gApqkCH2NubvDwj6iAxJkQTgahRLd/QGI7Km+2ltfKlgw8d4Kuo1HNTVN5HjuDAO yzPCT9azZMA2NS0caXG/gkjf4NYLltMpXFFBNM046/MlmJ3IP3r8UHhUxbAU7Zu6 YSyx2n+l87NvvegO6VxSGiLsVDRoZW2i+pqBi9YC5l7WMZPhLPmT8kVfNjUrRDtU K8dqdhsTwmfICyuyVWx3YT6/urW1/xjhKrrEDqn4PTAZLExRptJOTw== =WSu2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
