* Dave Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-19 21:41 +0000]: > On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 08:44:55AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > [-- PGP output follows (current time: wto 19 mar 2002 08:38:02 CET) --] > > gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit ELG-E key, ID BF4EB9F4, created 2001-05-24 > > "Michal Kochanowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" > > [-- End of PGP output --] > > > > [-- The following data is PGP/MIME encrypted --] > > > > test > > > > [-- End of PGP/MIME encrypted data --] > > > > - PF- 653/663: Michal Kochanowicz PGP lokalnie (e) > -- (all) > > PGP signature could NOT be verified. > > Please tell me what am I missinterpreting. Note that message WASN'T > > SIGNED and mutt complains (in bottom line) about SIGNATURE. > > Maybe I'm being stupid here, but it appears that mutt and GPG are > behaving correctly. How can it verify the signature on the message > if it wasn't signed?
I believe the problem is that mutt shouldn't even be trying to verify the signature since there isn't one. I'd say that the message about the signature not being verified should only appear if there is a signature but it's invalid. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] / DNRC / UMBC-LUG: http://lug.umbc.edu PGP: ID: D8C75CF5 print: 0A7D B3AD 2D10 1099 7649 AB64 04C2 05A6 --- -- If you decide to hold a double execution of the hero and an underling who failed or betrayed you, see to it that the hero is scheduled to go first. -- Evil Overlord's Handbook, entry 93 ---- --- --
