Re: PGP sigs fail verification

Top Page
Attachments:
Message as email
+ (text/plain)
+ signature.asc (application/pgp-signature)
Delete this message
Author: Miroslav Rovis
Date:  
To: mutt-users
Subject: Re: PGP sigs fail verification
On 160920-20:01-0700, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> I did the manual gpg test on multiple mails, this time properly
> massaging them into the RFC 3156 format.

To get to 3156 I had to go from the 1982's rfc822 (then follow rfc2045
through 2049, and only then 3156)... Only rfc822 done here.

These two are both from me:
> http://marc.info/?l=mutt-users&m=147420131617997&q=raw    GOOD    GOOD

>
> http://marc.info/?l=mutt-users&m=147417425713497&q=raw    BAD     GOOD


And this is Jan-Christophe's
> http://marc.info/?l=mutt-users&m=147418223314681&q=raw    BAD     BAD


> I conjecture that the BAD result in the case of Jean-Christophe's
> message, #4 above, results from him inserting a non-standard X- header
> in the signed MIME part. I don't have an explanation for the other BAD
> results.

I have rfc822 fresh in my mind. User headers are perfectly legal. They
only "might later be preempted" (quoting from that 1982 rfc) if their
name becomes officially accepted or sumesuch.

Regards!
--
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr