On 2015-02-12 23:46, Xavier Maillard wrote: > Hello, > > in my quest of the perfect setup, I am asking myself what is the > prefered way to sign a message: inline (like this one) or using a MIME header > ? > > Is there a big thumb rule to respect ? > > Regards > -- > Sent with my mu4e
This is a bit of a bikeshed discussion, but I'll still chime in. Pros of GPG/Mime: * It's a lot less ugly for users with no gpg support. The large signature block at the end and the gpg marks are hard to ignore. * AFAIK, inline gpg has issues with non-ascii characters. 😞 Correct me if I'm wrong. * Inline-gpg includes a signature for each attachment. This allows third parties to count how many files are attached (and their filenames, I believe). gpg/mime include one huge blob, so third parties can't tell this sort of metadata. In the end, I'd suggest you go with what you prefer on a whim, more than techinical reasons. I like gpg/mime because of the above reasons (the first two are pretty important to me). But from a techinical point of view, you'll find plenty clients that don't support one or the other. Some clients support one with relative ease and require tweaking for the other. The truth is, none of the two deprecates the other, so there's no strong convergence, IMHO. -- Hugo Osvaldo Barrera A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right. Q: Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
