[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: PGP vs. GPG && BAD SIGNATURE



Hi Ethan!

On Sat, 29 Apr 2000, Ethan Benson wrote:

> > mutt thinks:
> > > [-- PGP output follows (current time: Sun Apr 30 03:33:11 2000) --]
> > > gpg: Signature made Sun Apr 30 02:17:24 2000 CEST using DSA key ID 2C447AFC
> > > gpg: BAD signature from "Ethan R. Benson <erbenson@alaska.net>"
> > > [-- End of PGP output --]
> > 
> > What might be the reason?
> 
> that is interesting, the message that came back to me verified so it
> could not be a mail system garbling...  what MUA do you use?  do you
> have any procmail recipies that might be tinkering with messages? 

Your message had a Good Sig. Unfortunatly Pollywog included your sig
attachtment when replying and it's clear that the sig to your original
message did not work with the reply :)


					yours,
					peter

-- 
PGP encrypted messages prefered.
http://www.cosy.sbg.ac.at/~ppalfrad/

Attachment: pgpWdYsomj4rk.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: