Am So 05.01.2014, 10:15:51 schrieb Robert J. Hansen: > Your problem can be solved trivially by establishing a policy of, > "Encrypted messages must contain a notification within the signed > message body of who the message is encrypted for."
That is neither trivial nor reliable nor the best approach to deliver this information. > For many users this sort of policy is a good idea. For the majority > of users it's overkill. Like verifying fingerprints? 8-) > Why do you want a policy decision to be > permanently enshrined in GnuPG's mechanism? As I said in my first mail in this thread this isn't about changing GnuPG at all because a) this problem is one level above GnuPG b) GnuPG already has all the capabilities necessary to do this. As I also said the reason why I have asked this here is the availability of people who can make useful comments on that (and are probably interested in such general discussions). Hauke -- Crypto für alle: http://www.openpgp-schulungen.de/fuer/unterstuetzer/ http://userbase.kde.org/Concepts/OpenPGP_Help_Spread OpenPGP: 7D82 FB9F D25A 2CE4 5241 6C37 BF4B 8EEF 1A57 1DF5
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
