Mailing List Archive

Markus Gruber <Markus.Gruber@ilo.baynet.de> writes:

> Signing nonclear (with textmode on):
> [...]> echo "test" | gpg --sign --armor --textmode

No, I don't think so: This is the same behaviour as pgp 2.x if the
default +clearsign=on is used and may folks requested a somewhat pgp
like interface.

Shall I remove it?


Werner

wk@isil.d.shuttle.de said:
> No, I don't think so: This is the same behaviour as pgp 2.x if the
> default +clearsign=on is used and may folks requested a somewhat pgp
> like interface.

> Shall I remove it?

It would be nice to be able to sign nonclear (some call it binary, don´t know
why) *and* having textmode conversion to network style. I don´t know how to
say it gpg:
"gpg --clearsign --armor --textmode" does signing clear after textmode
conversion
"gpg --sign --armor --textmode" does it, too.
"gpg --sign --armor" does nonclear signing ?without? having converted to
textmode
It would be nice to have that feature.

Thanks
Markus

Markus Gruber <Markus.Gruber@ilo.baynet.de> writes:

>
> It would be nice to be able to sign nonclear (some call it binary, don´t know
> why) *and* having textmode conversion to network style. I don´t know how to
> say it gpg:
> "gpg --clearsign --armor --textmode" does signing clear after textmode
> conversion
> "gpg --sign --armor --textmode" does it, too.
> "gpg --sign --armor" does nonclear signing ?without? having converted to
> textmode
> It would be nice to have that feature.

I'm not sure whether I understand what you want.

A short explanation:

- textmode means that - only for the purpose of calculating the
the hash which is used - CR,LF is used instead of LF.
- It does not mean that a program has to output CR,LF
(yes, I know there is a bug in GnuPG).
- binary mode means that the signature is calculated over the
data without without any conversion.
- clearsign implies textmode.

I don't like this textmode for normal messages because it is not the
duty of an encryption program to do data conversion between different
formats (Why not adding an EBCDIC option too?) - this is something
a MUA has to handle. Textmode for clearsigned messages is another
game: Because MTAs are allowed to do some conversions on the
transferred data we must make sure that there is a standard which
is used to sign/verify such a message.

Moin,

Am / On Fri, 30 Oct 1998 19:14:33 +0100, schrieb Werner

>> Signing nonclear (with textmode on):
>> [...]> echo "test" | gpg --sign --armor --textmode
>
>No, I don't think so: This is the same behaviour as pgp 2.x if the
>default +clearsign=on is used and may folks requested a somewhat pgp
>like interface.
>Shall I remove it?

No, do not remove that. Keep some similarities to pgp, so the culture
shock for long time pgp-user keeps small.

Gruss,
Walter
--
Walter Koch Hochdahl am Neandertal
walterk@mail.dip.de ham:dg9ep@db0iz
http://home.pages.de/~dg9ep/ qrv:db0iz-9