|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] PGP (GPG): inline vs mime
|
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 08:44:45PM -0400, Jeff Abrahamson wrote:
> 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.
The PGP-Notes.txt[1] file distributed with mutt suggests using the
following procmail recipe to convert inline PGP data to PGP/Mime:
:0
* !^Content-Type: message/
* !^Content-Type: multipart/
* !^Content-Type: application/pgp
{
:0 fBw
* ^-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
* ^-----END PGP MESSAGE-----
| formail \
-i "Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text; x-action=encrypt"
:0 fBw
* ^-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
* ^-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
* ^-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| formail \
-i "Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text; x-action=sign"
}
Although personally, I would rather hit Meta-P to check an individual
inline message rather than trying to muck with MIME-types automatically.
-mct
[1] PGP-Notes.txt can be found at <http://www.mutt.org/doc/PGP-Notes.txt>,
or on a Debian system at <file:///usr/share/doc/mutt/PGP-Notes.txt.gz>.
--
perl -e'$u="\4\5\6";sub H{8*($_[1]%79)+($_[0]%8)}sub G{vec$u,H(@_),1}sub S{vec
($n,H(@_),1)=$_[2]}$_=q^{P`clear`;for$iX){PG($iY)?"O":" "forX8);P"\n"}for$iX){
forX8){$c=scalar grep{G@$_}[$i-1Y-1Z-1YZ-1Y+1ZY-1ZY+1Z+1Y-1Z+1YZ+1Y+1];S$iY,G(
$iY)?$c=~/[23]/?1:0:$c==3?1:0}}$u=$n;select$M,$C,$T,.2;redo}^;s/Z/],[\$i/g;s/Y
/,\$_/xg;s/X/(0..7/g;s/P/print+/g;eval' # Michael C. Toren <mct@toren.net>
___________________________________________________________________________
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
|
|