[ILUG] GPG signed messages

[Justin Mason]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Aidan Delaney writes:
> Hey all,
> 	Should GPG signed emails be done inline like
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> blah
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFBB9i9nlbhELOidY0RArSmAKCk1Edk46t8oatI/zqBTBzdPnsDeACfV+2W
> 1o10FvrvMRuHl1S3+zhLZ8Y=
> =9OCv
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> or as muti-part like this
> 
> --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy
> Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
> Content-Disposition: inline
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQFBB5YdVg0IYe59x04RAi09AKDBghf3ZKZcceMZV+uROrZ+GVMiPQCgomsL
> 66Yak8wQ4Q1HbXKTX13i1Qw=
> =DpTc
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy--
> 
> or are both ok?

The multipart is more correct and "modern", but naturally MS Outlook fails
to display it correctly.   So most people use the older, non-MIME style to
work around that.

- --j.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS

iD8DBQFBB9pHQTcbUG5Y7woRAk/bAKCg1oGBwzOKFRk1FfE1n96OKExYwACgi4RU
HetdZOuTKOm+UP98UGTY8Po=
=UciY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----