🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep28.162051.19586@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> wwe@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de (Wolfgang Weitz) writes:
>Hi,
>
>I'd like to use pgp2.0 to sign UseNet messages and mail so that
>
> (1). *everybody* can read my postings/mails (even without pgp) and 
> (2). those who do have it can also check the signature.
>
>My problem is that ``pgp -s text'' adds the signature in 'binary' form so that
>I can't send the resulting ``text.pgp'' as ordinary mail (although the original
>text is unchanged, satisfying (1) ). On the other hand: If I use ``pgp -sa text''
>the resulting ``text.asc'' is pure ASCII (satisfying (2)), but the receiver
>needs pgp to convert the base64 representation (of signature _and_ text)
>into the original text again.
>
>So:  Is there any pgp option which allows me to sign a text file with the signature
>in base64 representation and the message body unchanged? I know that I can generate 
>a signature in a separate file using ``pgp -bsa text'' and then include the resulting 
>signature ``text.asc'' in my mail, but this way the receiver must separate signature
>and message body into two files to have pgp check it. Is there a ``standard''
>way to have pgp do this directly?

Well, this would be pretty easy to do in a sh/awk/perl script, but be
aware that many mail transport agents may subtly change your mail so
that the signature will not be valid (for instance they might do
interesting things with tabs/trailing spaces/blank lines...). A
reasonable alternative might be to include both signed and unsigned
versions of the message (signed version using -a option). While this
would double the length of the messages in question, at least everyone
could read them and the signatures would be reasonably reliable.

Mark
-- 
Mark Henderson
markh@wimsey.bc.ca