On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 06:59:08PM -0400, Dan Boger wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 04:55:26PM -0400, Derek D. Martin wrote:
> > I have been using mutt with pgp for some time now, but I've now got
> > enough people that I want to send encrypted mail to on a regular basis
> > that I'd like to have mutt automatically encrypt mail to everyone for
> > whom I have public keys, and just leave it unencrytped for everyone
> > else.
>
> add to your .muttrc:
>
> source .muttrc.autoenc
>
> and add a cronjob:
>
> gpg --list-keys | perl -n -e '/(<.*?>)/; print "send-hook $1 \"set
>pgp_autoencrypt\"\n"' > ~/.muttrc.autoenc
>
> would that do? :)
It looks like it will... I'll give it a try ASAP. Thanks!
> great idea, btw, I like it!
Thanks again... I thought so too. =8^)
Ok, another question for the crypto fans out there. I've been getting
complaints from people I know that use other mailers that they simply
can't get my signature to validate when I send them signed mail.
Apparently, mutt is the only mailer on the planet that handles PGP
signatures the way it does, from what people are telling me.
Also, while I have made almost no effort to verify this (and of course
that means I didn't), I've been told that the way mutt handles
signatures is in violation of the OpenPGP standard, and that the GnuPG
people are pretty unhappy about it.
What's the deal?
--
---------------------------------------------------
Derek Martin | Unix/Linux geek
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D
Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu
