Hi Chris,
So, are you saying that my messages break your signatures of replies to my
messages?
Regards,
Hugo
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Hi Hugo,
I did make some test with your last post:
Outlook-incoming as Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
If signing “something” (your choice) and resending, signature is broken.
If signing „something“ and resending, signature is broken.
Hi Chris,
Why break quotation marks "1AF778E4" and "good" or "bad" in OP signature
verification while answering?
I hope I understood you correctly.
I use “"” when it is required. In regular text I try to follow typographical
conventions for text.
Nothing seems to be broken on my end. It mi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Tuesday 9 December 2014 at 10:58:47 AM, in
, gnupgpacker
wrote:
> Gpg-1.4.8 isn't captable using edDAS. In my opinion
> output would be ok if a new edDSA key has been used!?
> If RSA signing key has been used, there might be some
> fault...
Bo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Tuesday 9 December 2014 at 9:22:07 AM, in
, Hugo Hinterberger
wrote:
> Hi,
> It seems that you (MFPA) changed your signing practice
> after I noted that I can't verify signatures created
> with your key “1AF778E4”. I did not know that one cou
Hi,
It seems that you (MFPA) changed your signing practice after I noted that
I can't verify signatures created with your key “1AF778E4”. I did not know
that one could sign a message with two keys in one signing block.
I am wondering if there is a way to collapse the verification result for
