On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 09:01:45PM -0500, Duncan Findlay wrote:
| On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 08:49:10AM +0700, Olivier Nicole wrote:
| > Me thinks it would even be a good thing is SA could verify the signature :)
| >
| > But where to get the key from?
| >
|
| Please don't verify the signature. Some things are best left to the MUA.
|
| Verifying takes a LONG time, in some cases. My MUA also verifies. Does it
| make sense for both to do so?
As I haven't figured out how to use gpg yet, what does mutt do with a
message that doesn't verify? The nice part of having SA verify the
signature is that bad messages are dropped before you look at them.
If mutt merely notifies you when you read the message, then that
doesn't help prevent spam from reaching you. Surely turning off such
a check would be configurable as well!
-D
PS. all I see with signed messages is a notice that gpg couldn't
verify the signature. with my current setup, of course it can't! :-)
--
Microsoft: "Windows NT 4.0 now has the same user-interface as Windows 95"
Windows 95: "Press CTRL-ALT-DEL to reboot"
Windows NT 4.0: "Press CTRL-ALT-DEL to login"
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
