On 2001-12-27 at 10:37 +0800, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > > Does that have _any_ legal value in your country?
>
> About as much value as, say, the disclaimer in my .sig below
Managerial incompetence and dictates are planet-wide constants, then?
> > [ Content of type application/pgp-signature deleted ]
>
> You might want to clearsign instead of using pgp-mime, as mailman is
> configured to drop attachments on the floor. This should do it in mutt -
I tend to reply to poster and to list, so since I auto-sign all mails
and I *gasp* let mutt remember my passphrase for a little time, it
doesn't bother me much. The list gets one line. Personally, I'd prefer
to not see lists filter out pgp-signatures, simply because I do irritate
people and I have had mails forged to be from me. Including fake bounce
messages to get me off lists.
Authentication is good. Non-repudiation just makes me more careful
about what I write whilst under the influence of alcohol. Sometimes.
> macro compose S "Fgpg -a --clearsign -u 0xEDEDEFB9"
If the listmaster dislikes crypto-sigs enough to filter them, then I'm
not going to try to bypass the filters. I'll let the list strip them,
if I bother to sign. I normally sign all mails, but I'll not sign this
one, just for you Suresh. :^)
(hrm, looking at this random sig: I'm not criticising or condemning, and
not really complaining, just expressing a personal preference. Honest.)
--
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
-- Ben Franklin
