<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: bad PGP sig (was: When is a sig not a sig?)



 On Friday, September 24, 2004 at 8:36:01 PM +0000, James R. Grinter wrote:

> What about:
>| X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at clerc.nl

    Unlikely, because:

 -1) DTG BADs have no Amavis.

 -2) Thomas TG's <20040918113442.GA8140@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
GOOD but MIME structure modified (would have been BAD if had QP dots)
has no Amavis. Thomas probably has pgp_strict_enc=no.

 -3) René's <20040903224205.GF1712@xxxxxxxx> GOOD from before agent57
crash has same amavisd-new-20030616-p10 but his MIME structure is
untouched (sadly there were no dots to double proof).

 -4) all ~g PGP/MIME signed posts (even GOOD and no dots) since colonelk
have their MIME structure modified (harmlessly). That's nearly 40 posts
from Thorsten, René, Kyle, Michelle, Robert Kowalski, Michael MDS, DTG,
David Dombrowsky, Joshua, DTG, Alec, and John JJF. Direct mails from two
of them are untouched.

 -5) PGP/MIME signed posts from agent57 era are mostly untouched.


    No point is absolute proof, but if I'm right that dots deQPing and
empty lines dropping are linked... Probability reaches 1.07, or about.

    René, Thomas: Could you please send me a private signed mail with 3
dots on a line? With pgp_strict_enc=yes preferably.
...


> I can see it in the messages before they've got anywhere near
> Majordomo-2 (all they've been through is qmail).

    A new DJB holly war against PGP/MIME, and nobody told us? ;-)


Bye!    Alain.
-- 
Mail::Audit users break PGP for everyone else on a mailing list!
They should stop doing so immediately!
        « Perl considered HARMFUL » PCC CB on MU. © June 2002