On 06/01/14 01:51, Hauke Laging wrote: > Let me guess: Modifying the mail client so that it automatically removes > the word "not" would be illegitimate because for some strange reason > that would be "solving social problems by technical means"...
I guess it boils down to the point that I just don't see a use case. I believe there are two scenario's you're treating: - You wish to give significance to a mail being encrypted; this, for you, changes the context of the contents. I disagree; I'd rather see it context-free and unambiguous[1]. - You wish to catch noobs in the act when they forget to encrypt. I think secure communications with noobs is impossible, so it doesn't help to plug a single hole in the sieve[2]. The result is that I see no application for what you describe. At to that the fact I find it a rather ugly kludge to sign a single message twice instead of keeping all authenticated data inside the one signature, and you've lost me. So I guess this discussion is indeed pretty much done. HTH, Peter. [1] Hmmm, maybe we should define a formal e-mail language ;) [2] I'm using noobs rather broadly here, since I think it takes a lot of attention and rigour to secure communications. -- I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail. You can send me encrypted mail if you want some privacy. My key is available at <http://digitalbrains.com/2012/openpgp-key-peter> _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users