On Sep 21, 2008, at 10:30 PM, Kevin Hilton wrote:
If you never want to see that algorithm used ever, leave it
off the list completely.
Not to beat a dead horse, but this statement isn't exactly true. The
sender can force the use of a particular algorithm that is not on the
list. I take objection to the use of the work "never".
Oh, for crying out loud. The sender can do whatever the sender
likes. That's what is so nice about being the sender. The sender can
send unencrypted, but we don't mention that option. The sender could
also choose to encapsulate their message in a text-to-speech MP3, but
we don't mention that option either. Heck, there could be some bug in
the sender's program that causes it to use the wrong algorithm, and
again we don't mention that.
I'm not going to prefix every single statement I make with an "Except
in the case where the sender is intentionally violating the spec and
is ignoring all the warning messages telling them to knock it
off...." We need to have some baseline of communication here, and
avoid taking something that is really very simple and making it
tragically complex.
David
_______________________________________________
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
