[PLUG] PGP (GPG): inline vs mime

[Jeff Abrahamson <jeff@purple.com>]

Once in a while I get an inline PGP-signed message.  They look
something like this:

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


    [message text]

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

    iD4DBQFCYDClzJ8rDInR5JcRAlShAKCp9SEx3OFl7vf6WstLRTrDBT4H5wCTB2ui
    TY+Ui9PauqQIzVRPXC1nEA==
    =HW1g
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

That's really what's in the mail spool file, not just what mutt shows
me.

Mutt will verify the PGP key if I type escape-P.  But I don't
understand why.  Is there a good reason for people to do this, or
should I politely suggest they use PGP/Mime instead?  I also don't see
how to get mutt to auto-validate such messages the way it does for
PGP/Mime.

If the message is garbled, the signature doesn't seem to provide a key
ID, either, which seems odd to me.  Is this right?

Any suggestions?

-- 
 Jeff

 Jeff Abrahamson  <http://www.purple.com/jeff/>    +1 215/837-2287
 GPG fingerprint: 1A1A BA95 D082 A558 A276  63C6 16BF 8C4C 0D1D AE4B

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --        http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug