GnuPG and trailing whitespace handling

[Russ Allbery]

Jon Callas <jcallas at nai.com> writes:

> If you follow the RFC, you will be backwards compatible.

> If you want to be forwards compatible (meaning that you accept things
> old versions generate), all you have to do is not generate an error when
> an old version fails to blank-trim.

Pardon me if I'm confused here, but wouldn't that involve checking any
failing detached text-mode signature a second time with the original data
without trailing whitespace stripped to see if it then passes?

And isn't it impossible to both follow the RFC and generate detached
text-mode signatures that will verify correctly with PGP 5.0 if the data
has trailing whitespace?  In that either the signatures will verify with
PGP 5.0 or they will verify with RFC-compliant checkers, but never with
both?

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)         <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>