OpenPGP vs inline PGP

[Robin Lynn Frank]

=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

On Thursday 10 July 2003 16:15, David Ellement wrote:
> On 2003-07-10, Robin Lynn Frank wrote
>
> > To me, it works or it doesn't.
>
> On 2003-07-10, Robin Lynn Frank wrote
>
> > The only reason I even attempted this was to have a way to verify
> > these @#$%&!& detached signatures.
>
> Just curious: what do you do about inline signatures?  They aren't
> guaranteed to verify, which seems like it doesn't fit with the need for
> something that "either works or it doesn't".

Have no problem at all verifying them.  Kmail's built-in facility for=20
verifying inline pgp sigs has worked flawlessly.  I've even tested it with=
=20
messages I've deliberately tampered with.  The plugin actually will do=20
verification of detached sigs.  Its just the fact that using gpg-agent scre=
ws=20
everything else up for us as we can't even get our passphrases to work.
=2D --=20
Robin Lynn Frank | Director of Operations | Paradigm-Omega, LLC
=A9 2003 Paradigm-Omega, LLC.  All rights reserved. Unauthorized
reproduction or dissemination is prohibited.  If the PGP signature is missi=
ng,=20
please forward it to  security@paradigm-omega.com. Incoming mail with S/MIM=
E=20
or detatched PGP Signatures will be considered unsigned.
=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/Dfo4mq9pLlRaCV8RA2KxAJ900IDPRf88AKchTWFdpR1xdad0JgCeO/53
vGmnArc+TYX5qcD3ms92qFE=3D
=3D1Icz
=2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----