On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 01:45:17PM -0400, Robert J. Hansen wrote: > IMO, if your client is showing correct PGP/MIME signatures on this list, > you should file a defect report about your client. The message has been > changed in transit and is no longer in the exact same state as it was > when the sender issued it. The change may be trivial, but it's still a > change, and IMO it is not the job of the MUA to try and fix the botchery > inflicted by GNU Mailman. The correct thing to do, IMO, is to report to > the user the true state of affairs: "the signature is not correct and > the message appears to have been altered in transit."
I don't understand this. Mutt verifies the signature correctly, but Mutt is calling GnuPG externally. If the message was signed with a space, and if the space is being replaced by a tab character, then the signature should fail. Because it is not failing, is telling me that it was initially a tab when you signed the mail, and something either mangled it to be a space, or your diff(1) is reading a text that mangled the tab to a space. I don't see how this is the failure of the MUA, but GnuPG says the signature verifies. -- . o . o . o . . o o . . . o . . . o . o o o . o . o o . . o o o o . o . . o o o o . o o o
pgpSYeACP6BFj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users