On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 04:21:38PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> 08.05.2012 16:16, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> > I think they've come a long way in mediactions to address paranoia
> > these last few years... Seriousl
On 5/8/12 4:02 PM, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 08.05.2012 15:43, Lars Noodén kirjoitti:
>> On 5/8/12 3:41 PM, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
>>> Note that gnupg mailing lists are also affected and they aren't
>>> lists themselves, the problem is in mailing list software. I
>>> think that they all use GNU Ma
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Mika Suomalainen
wrote:
>
> And if someone spoofs email from my address to this list and it's
> unsigned and my messages to this list are always unsigned, I cannot
> say that I always sign my emails and that isn't sent by me.
What a life-threatening problem! ;)
-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 16:16, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> I think they've come a long way in mediactions to address paranoia
> these last few years... Seriously, why the devil would anyone want
> to spoof your email?! What are you, Black Ops?
If I re
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 04:06:54PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> 08.05.2012 15:47, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:41:40PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> > 08.05.2012 15:38, Indulekha kirjoitt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 15:47, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:41:40PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 08.05.2012 15:38, Indulekha kirjoitti:
>>>> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:05:30PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen
>>&g
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 15:43, Lars Noodén kirjoitti:
> On 5/8/12 3:41 PM, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
>> Note that gnupg mailing lists are also affected and they aren't
>> lists themselves, the problem is in mailing list software. I
>> t
On 5/8/12 3:41 PM, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> Note that gnupg mailing lists are also affected and they aren't lists
> themselves, the problem is in mailing list software. I think that they
> all use GNU Mailman, which is very popular among mailing lists.
>
> People don't have a choice if they are o
ng manual.txt, I still have no idea what setting is
> responsible for this behaviour or why it doesn't work for you.
>
> BTW, you can extend your display_filter file with something like this:
>
> /^-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE/,/-END PGP SIGNATURE/d
>
Oh, bless you for tha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 15:33, Johann Spies kirjoitti:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:20:21PM +0200, Jochen Spieker wrote:
>
>>
>> muttrc:
>>
>> set display_filter='sed -f ~/.mutt/display-filter'
>>
>> ~/.mutt
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:41:40PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> 08.05.2012 15:38, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:05:30PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> > 08.05.2012 15:03, Indulekha kirjoitt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/05/12 13:33, Johann Spies wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:20:21PM +0200, Jochen Spieker wrote:
>
>>
>> muttrc:
>>
>> set display_filter='sed -f ~/.mutt/display-filter'
>>
>> ~/.mutt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 15:38, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:05:30PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 08.05.2012 15:03, Indulekha kirjoitti:
>>>> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:00:16PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen
>>&g
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:20:21PM +0200, Jochen Spieker wrote:
>
> muttrc:
>
> set display_filter='sed -f ~/.mutt/display-filter'
>
> ~/.mutt/display-filter:
>
> /^gpg:/d
Thanks. I have learnt something new in this thread.
I still see similar messages like this on nearly all the signed emai
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:05:30PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> 08.05.2012 15:03, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:00:16PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> > 08.05.2012 14:57, Indulekha kirjoitt
sn't work for you.
BTW, you can extend your display_filter file with something like this:
/^-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE/,/-END PGP SIGNATURE/d
J.
--
I wish I had been aware enough to enjoy my time as a toddler.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA
Lars Noodén:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:45:59PM +0200, Jochen Spieker wrote:
>> This is inline vs. MIME:
>>
>> http://www.phildev.net/pgp/pgp_clear_vs_mime.html
>
> How old is that? There's no date and it mentions Pine. Alpine has been
> out to replace i
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:45:59PM +0200, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> This is inline vs. MIME:
>
> http://www.phildev.net/pgp/pgp_clear_vs_mime.html
How old is that? There's no date and it mentions Pine. Alpine has been
out to replace it since 2007 or so.
Regards
/Lars
--
To UNSU
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:05:10PM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/05/12 13:03, Indulekha wrote:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:00:16PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> > 08.05.2012 14:57, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> &
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 15:03, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:00:16PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 08.05.2012 14:57, Indulekha kirjoitti:
>>>> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:53:30PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen
>>>> w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/05/12 13:03, Indulekha wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:00:16PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 08.05.2012 14:57, Indulekha kirjoitti:
>>>> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:53:30PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen
>>>> w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 15:01, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:57:27PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 08.05.2012 14:52, Indulekha kirjoitti:
>>>> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:45:59PM +0200, Jochen Spieker
>>&
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:00:16PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> 08.05.2012 14:57, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:53:30PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> > 08.05.2012 14:45, Jochen Spieker kir
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:57:27PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> 08.05.2012 14:52, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:45:59PM +0200, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> >> Indulekha:
> >>>
> &g
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/05/12 12:57, Indulekha wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:53:30PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 08.05.2012 14:45, Jochen Spieker kirjoitti:
>>>> Indulekha:
>>>>>
>>>>> No,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 14:57, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:53:30PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 08.05.2012 14:45, Jochen Spieker kirjoitti:
>>>> Indulekha:
>>>>>
>>>>> No,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 14:52, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:45:59PM +0200, Jochen Spieker wrote:
>> Indulekha:
>>>
>>> No, I think you may have an incorrect or incomplete
>>> configuration
>>
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:53:30PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> 08.05.2012 14:45, Jochen Spieker kirjoitti:
> > Indulekha:
> >>
> >> No, I think you may have an incorrect or incomplete
> >> confi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 14:45, Jochen Spieker kirjoitti:
> Indulekha:
>>
>> No, I think you may have an incorrect or incomplete
>> configuration
>
> This is inline vs. MIME:
>
> http://www.phildev.net/pgp/pgp_clear_vs
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:45:59PM +0200, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> Indulekha:
> >
> > No, I think you may have an incorrect or incomplete configuration
>
> This is inline vs. MIME:
>
> http://www.phildev.net/pgp/pgp_clear_vs_mime.html
>
Aha, so yours is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 14:46, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:29:39PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 08.05.2012 14:20, Lisi kirjoitti:
>>>> On Tuesday 08 May 2012 12:11:56 Indulekha wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, May 0
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:43:11PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> 08.05.2012 14:40, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 12:34:02PM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote: On
> > 08/05/12 12:29, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
Indulekha:
>
> No, I think you may have an incorrect or incomplete configuration
This is inline vs. MIME:
http://www.phildev.net/pgp/pgp_clear_vs_mime.html
J.
--
I can tell a Whopper[tm] from a BigMac[tm] and Coke[tm] from Pepsi[tm].
[Agree] [Disagree]
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:29:39PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> 08.05.2012 14:20, Lisi kirjoitti:
> > On Tuesday 08 May 2012 12:11:56 Indulekha wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:53:23AM +0100, Phil Dobbin wro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 14:40, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 12:34:02PM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote: On
> 08/05/12 12:29, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
>>>> 08.05.2012 14:20, Lisi kirjoitti:
>>>>> On Tuesday 08 May 2012 12
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/05/12 12:40, Indulekha wrote:
[snip]
>
> No, I think you may have an incorrect or incomplete configuration
>
In what way?
Cheers,
Phil...
- --
currently (ab)using
Debian Squeeze, Fedora Verne, OS X Snow Leopard, Ubunt
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 12:34:02PM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 08/05/12 12:29, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> > 08.05.2012 14:20, Lisi kirjoitti:
> >> On Tuesday 08 May 2012 12:11:56 Indulekha wrote:
> >>> O
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:20:21PM +0200, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> Indulekha:
> >
> > Anyone know a way to simply filter out all that annoying gpg/pgp noise?
>
> muttrc:
>
> set display_filter='sed -f ~/.mutt/display-filter'
>
> ~/.mutt/display-filter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/05/12 12:29, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 08.05.2012 14:20, Lisi kirjoitti:
>> On Tuesday 08 May 2012 12:11:56 Indulekha wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:53:23AM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
>> Increasing the pool of ser
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/05/12 12:26, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 08.05.2012 14:15, Phil Dobbin kirjoitti:
>> On 08/05/12 12:11, Indulekha wrote:
>
>>> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:53:23AM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
>>> Increasing the pool
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 14:20, Lisi kirjoitti:
> On Tuesday 08 May 2012 12:11:56 Indulekha wrote:
>> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:53:23AM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> Increasing the pool of servers that gpg checks may alleviate your
> problem but
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
08.05.2012 14:15, Phil Dobbin kirjoitti:
> On 08/05/12 12:11, Indulekha wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:53:23AM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
>> Increasing the pool of servers that gpg checks may alleviate
>> your pr
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 12:20:56PM +0100, Lisi wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 May 2012 12:11:56 Indulekha wrote:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:53:23AM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > Incre
Indulekha:
>
> Anyone know a way to simply filter out all that annoying gpg/pgp noise?
muttrc:
set display_filter='sed -f ~/.mutt/display-filter'
~/.mutt/display-filter:
/^gpg:/d
J.
--
I no longer believe in father christmas but have no trouble
comprehending a nuclear ap
On Tuesday 08 May 2012 12:11:56 Indulekha wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:53:23AM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Increasing the pool of servers that gpg checks may alleviate your
> > problem but it's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/05/12 12:11, Indulekha wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:53:23AM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> Increasing the pool of servers that gpg checks may alleviate your
> problem but it's more than likely to be people haven't
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:53:23AM +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Increasing the pool of servers that gpg checks may alleviate your
> problem but it's more than likely to be people haven't exported their key.
>
>
have line like this in your ~/.gnupg/gpg.conf:
> > keyserver keyserver.pgp.com
>
> Try replacing it with
> > keyserver hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
>
Thanks!
That fixed the upfront error messages, but I still have to see
this at the end:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
On 08/05/12 20:43, Indulekha wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm getting this with most gog/pgp-signed mails received
> from this list (using mutt):
>
> [-- PGP output follows (current time: Tue 08 May 2012 05:35:27 AM CDT) --]
> gpgkeys: key 7356B378DEA22DE9 not found on keyserver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/05/12 11:43, Indulekha wrote:
> I'm getting this with most gog/pgp-signed mails received from this
> list (using mutt):
>
> [-- PGP output follows (current time: Tue 08 May 2012 05:35:27 AM
> CDT) --] gpgkeys: key 7356B3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
08.05.2012 13:43, Indulekha kirjoitti:
> Hi,
>
> I'm getting this with most gog/pgp-signed mails received from this
> list (using mutt):
>
> [-- PGP output follows (current time: Tue 08 May 2012 05:35:27 AM
Hi,
I'm getting this with most gog/pgp-signed mails received
from this list (using mutt):
[-- PGP output follows (current time: Tue 08 May 2012 05:35:27 AM CDT) --]
gpgkeys: key 7356B378DEA22DE9 not found on keyserver
gpg: Signature made Tue 08 May 2012 02:04:44 AM CDT using RSA key ID DEA
On Du, 22 apr 12, 20:52:46, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 04:22:14PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > Can you reproduce this with local copies from a mail agent (ideally
> > mutt)? My quick experiments failed. Just curious, nothing critical.
>
> You need to get ahold of the signed
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> I tried saving the individual parts ('v' and then 's' ), but that didn't
> work. Not curious enough to try your mbox method, mutt's automatic
> verification works fine :)
That won't work because the saved part is the *body* of the part and
not the raw encoded bits of that
On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 04:22:14PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> Can you reproduce this with local copies from a mail agent (ideally
> mutt)? My quick experiments failed. Just curious, nothing critical.
You need to get ahold of the signed part without mutt decoding it. I
achieved it by piping th
On Du, 22 apr 12, 10:47:41, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> >
> > Can you reproduce this with local copies from a mail agent (ideally
> > mutt)? My quick experiments failed. Just curious, nothing critical.
As I said, just curious :)
> mutt will
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 16:22:14 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Du, 15 apr 12, 16:28:28, Camaleón wrote:
>>
>> As I thought, verifying PGP/MIME detached signatures can be also done
>> from command line with GPG. I have tried with some posts from this same
>> mailing
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Du, 15 apr 12, 16:28:28, Camaleón wrote:
> > As I thought, verifying PGP/MIME detached signatures can be also done from
> > command line with GPG. I have tried with some posts from this same mailing
> > list coming from us
On Du, 15 apr 12, 16:28:28, Camaleón wrote:
>
> As I thought, verifying PGP/MIME detached signatures can be also done from
> command line with GPG. I have tried with some posts from this same mailing
> list coming from users that use detached signatures and in every case it
&
#x27;s see, No FUD in there, safe to proceed.
> As I thought, verifying PGP/MIME detached signatures can be also done from
> command line with GPG. I have tried with some posts from this same mailing
> list coming from users that use detached signatures and in every case it
&g
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 19:38:46 +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> 15.04.2012 19:28, Camaleón kirjoitti:
(...)
>> As I thought, verifying PGP/MIME detached signatures can be also done
>> from command line with GPG. I have tried with some posts from this same
>> mailing list c
ollowing content can damage your mind. You've been advised)
>
Ignore people who say so. Your posts are usually helpful.
By the way, same people told me to use PGP/MIME and when I asked how to
do so they didn't say anything useful.
>
> As I thought, verifying PGP/MIME detach
t; If Enigmail can parse and verify the signed posts I see no reason for
> gpg cannot do the same.
(Disclaimer: newbies and soft-minded readers, please, stop reading here.
The following content can damage your mind. You've been advised)
As I thought, verifying PGP/MIME detached signature
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 03:53:19PM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 02:43:51PM +, Camaleón wrote:
> > > If you don't know, please refrain from guessing!
> >
> > Refrain yourself from reading :-/
>
> I'm not at significant risk of being (unintentionally) misled by you: newbi
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 14:43:51 +, Camaleón wrote:
(...)
> Anyway, I get the posts through a nntp news server (Gmane), I don't know
> - because I've not tried- if the header information provided would be
> enough to be able to verify the signature manually.
Mmm, I tried this yesterday and it se
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 16:52:15 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 03:49:08PM +, Camaleón wrote:
>> What problem could I have? Everybody can have their opinion and express
>> it. I do also have mine and thus encourage you to avoid reading my
>> posts given that you seem to find t
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 03:49:08PM +, Camaleón wrote:
> What problem could I have? Everybody can have their opinion and express
> it. I do also have mine and thus encourage you to avoid reading my posts
> given that you seem to find them offensive.
I don't, and never said that, but I can see
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 16:22:05 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 03:14:49PM +, Camaleón wrote:
>> If you're so worried, apply for a newbie-sitter job.
>
> What exactly is that?
It was a pun meaning "a person who cares about newbies".
>> Still, you failed to reply what was "m
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 03:14:49PM +, Camaleón wrote:
> If you're so worried, apply for a newbie-sitter job.
What exactly is that?
> Still, you failed to reply what was "misleading". Sigh.
Indeed, I haven't taken the time to go back and pick out the ones
that caught my attention in particula
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 15:53:19 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 02:43:51PM +, Camaleón wrote:
>> > If you don't know, please refrain from guessing!
>>
>> Refrain yourself from reading :-/
>
> I'm not at significant risk of being (unintentionally) misled by you:
> newbies are
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 02:43:51PM +, Camaleón wrote:
> > If you don't know, please refrain from guessing!
>
> Refrain yourself from reading :-/
I'm not at significant risk of being (unintentionally) misled by you: newbies
are.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.o
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 10:00:44 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On 09/04/12 17:54, Camaleón wrote:
>> Look at "man gpg", there must be also an option here for verifiying the
>> signature.
>
> On the one hand, I think the energy and enthusiasm to which you bring to
> helping people on -user is admirable.
On 09/04/12 17:54, Camaleón wrote:
> Look at "man gpg", there must be also an option here for verifiying the
> signature.
On the one hand, I think the energy and enthusiasm to which you bring to
helping people on -user is admirable. On the other, sometimes your
replies are information-free, or e
On 09/04/12 17:48, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:
> To verify PGP/MIME
> vs inline is the same if you were using the GPG or PGP command to verify
> a clearsigned file or not. With PGP/MIME you'd have to save the original
> email which would in a multi-part MIME email be an attachment i
se.
>
> HTH,
> Bob
So it's not possible to verify message from mailing list archives and I
shouldn't do it even with INLINE.
You have just removed one of my reasons to not use PGP/MIME :).
Thank you to everyone who helped. I think that this issue is now solved.
--
ent as possible.
> > > As this list seems to be against GPG INLINE signatures, I have
PGP inline signatures are just annoying. They aren't fatal. They are
simply the very old way. Because they were annoying an improved way
was developed. Generally we think that using PGP/MIME is a s
On 09.04.2012 19:54, Camaleón wrote:
<...>
>> PS. Sorry again for typoing PGP/MIME as S/MIME.
>
> You said PGP/MIME, I got S/MIME O:-)
>
> Look at "man gpg", there must be also an option here for verifiying the
> signature.
>
> Greetings,
>
I w
On 09.04.2012 19:48, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:
> On 04/09/2012 12:11 PM, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
>> On 09.04.2012 18:44, Camaleón wrote:
>>> On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 18:04:13 +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
<...>
> PGP/MIME just makes it easier for those that don't
On 04/09/2012 12:11 PM, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> On 09.04.2012 18:44, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 18:04:13 +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
[...]
>> I recognize it's annoying to delete the extra text when replying to PGP/
>> GPG inline messages but I can liv
On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 19:11:04 +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> On 09.04.2012 18:44, Camaleón wrote:
>>> As this list seems to be against GPG INLINE signatures,
>>
>> Uh? First notice I have :-?
>
> The other questions and PGP/INLINE hate are in some of those three
ht move by
> opening a new thread :-)
>
>> As this list seems to be against GPG INLINE signatures,
>
> Uh? First notice I have :-?
The other questions and PGP/INLINE hate are in some of those three (or
more) of those different "[OT] Posting styles" threads.
> I recognize i
against GPG INLINE signatures,
Uh? First notice I have :-?
I recognize it's annoying to delete the extra text when replying to PGP/
GPG inline messages but I can live with that.
> I have promised to move to S/MIME (with devices which support it) when
> someone on this list tells me how
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I am now asking this question for the third time, but now in separate
thread.
As this list seems to be against GPG INLINE signatures, I have
promised to move to S/MIME (with devices which support it) when
someone on this list tells me how do I
On 09/04/12 01:55, Chris Bannister wrote:
>
> [I've posted my reply on d-community-offto...@lists.alioth.debian.org]
>
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 11:46:11PM +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>
> (...)
>
> Interested parties ... please head to
> d-community-offto...@lists.alioth.debian.org
>
>
http:
On 09/04/12 01:32, Joey Hess wrote:
> Scott Ferguson wrote (remainder of your trolling ignored):
>>> as this will habituate people to expect your mail to be signed,
>>
>> Nope. Wishful thinking at best.
>
> True story: Last weekend, I sent a friend an email to get him come
> help me move a couch.
[I've posted my reply on d-community-offto...@lists.alioth.debian.org]
On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 11:46:11PM +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:
(...)
Interested parties ... please head to
d-community-offto...@lists.alioth.debian.org
--
"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet."
Chris Bannister wrote:
Some people say that if you get a laptop with a finger identification
setup on it you are safer, I say, the opposite, I want to keep all my
fingers.
All that does is prevent someone seeing your password
--
Sent from Free Open Source Software
Debian GNU/Linux
--
On 08/04/12 22:36, Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 01:55:06PM +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>> On 08/04/12 12:26, Chris Bannister wrote:
>>> I suppose you mean encrypting, you can still read signed mail. The point
>>> to note is that *if suddenly* two people start encrypting their m
On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 01:55:06PM +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> On 08/04/12 12:26, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > I suppose you mean encrypting, you can still read signed mail. The point
> > to note is that *if suddenly* two people start encrypting their mail,
> > that alone will set off alarm bells
people will complain about receiving plain text mail also.
I always setup Enigmail in builds with the default Icedove set to sign
by unencrypted emails using PGP/Mime and *not* trusting keys, by
default, and, requires a passphrase (user's know how to turn off signing
on a per email basis). I al
On Ma, 31 mai 11, 17:18:43, Camaleón wrote:
>
> P.S. IIRC Mutt allows to use both styles, and IMO that's what a good MUA
> does, giving options to users.
I agree, but I would still avoid if if at all possible, since I doubt it
gets too much testing lately.
Regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussi
On Tue, 31 May 2011 19:53:56 +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Ma, 31 mai 11, 13:03:42, Camaleón wrote:
>>
>> It looks like only outline PGP signing is fully supported, but sounds a
>> bit strange that nowadays this cannot be changed in the MUA.
>
> Probably becau
On Ma, 31 mai 11, 13:03:42, Camaleón wrote:
>
> It looks like only outline PGP signing is fully supported, but sounds a
> bit strange that nowadays this cannot be changed in the MUA.
Probably because inline is deprecated for years ;)
Regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Deb
On Tue, 31 May 2011 10:10:39 +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> Does anyone knows whether or not evolution (in squeeze) support
> inline PGP signing ? I do need inline signing for a robot that only
> support inline PGP.
By reading this FAQ:
http://live.gnome.org/Evol
Hi,
Does anyone knows whether or not evolution (in squeeze) support
inline PGP signing ? I do need inline signing for a robot that only
support inline PGP.
Thanks
--
Mathieu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troubl
In <1246840985.5325.84.ca...@ursa-minor.network.ursamundi.org>, Paul Johnson
wrote:
>On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 09:56 -0700, Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 11:31:17AM +0430, a dehqan wrote:
>> > I'll be thankfull if you guide ; How to creat private PG
On Sun,05.Jul.09, 22:37:51, Ben Olive wrote:
> Oops, maybe I should reply all.
Only if you remove the posters address first (and leave only the list).
The correct way would be to use reply-to-list
http://wiki.debian.org/ReplyToListEmailClients
Regards,
Andrei
--
If you can't explain it simpl
l if you guide ;
>> How to creat private PGP key in debian 5 ? with which software ?
>
> You need gpg (should be installed). You might want to read:
>
> http://www.dewinter.com/gnupg_howto/english/GPGMiniHowto.html
>
> Regards,
> Andrei
> --
> If you can't e
On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 09:56 -0700, Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 11:31:17AM +0430, a dehqan wrote:
>
> > I'll be thankfull if you guide ; How to creat private PGP key in
> > debian 5 ? with which software ?
>
> If you have KDE installed, the
On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 11:31:17AM +0430, a dehqan wrote:
> I'll be thankfull if you guide ; How to creat private PGP key in
> debian 5 ? with which software ?
If you have KDE installed, the KGPG tool makes creating and managing key
pairs very easy. The gnome equivalents aren't q
101 - 200 of 881 matches
Mail list logo
