Signature as attachment ?

[Florian Weimer]

Josh Huber <huber+keyword+gnupg_users.73c168@alum.wpi.edu> writes:

> Florian Weimer <Weimer@CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE> writes:
>
>> Mutt comes to my mind.  Gnus supports it too, but only in a very
>> limited way (the user interface needs *much* improvement).
>
> How is the support in Gnus limited?

If I send someone a message, and I've got his key, Gnus doesn't
suggest to encrypt the message.

If I request encryption, Gnus doesn't let me chose the keys to use.

Sometimes, Gnus flags a signature which is valid as invalid (and IIRC
vice versa).

Gnus does not deal with trust at all.  From the Gnus perspective, all
keys are trusted.

Gnus does not include all diagnotic output it receives from GnuPG by
default.  It should, crucial information might be omitted otherwise.

Gnus cannot create symmetrically encrypted messages, I think.

Gnus does not deal properly with encrypted messages which do not use
OpenPGP/MIME (that's my impression, maybe it's a local configuration
issue).

And so on. :-/

-- 
Florian Weimer 	                  Weimer@CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE
University of Stuttgart           http://CERT.Uni-Stuttgart.DE/people/fw/
RUS-CERT                          fax +49-711-685-5898