[YLUG] gpg signatures

[Arthur Clune]

On 29 Sep 2006, at 14:01, Al Girling wrote:

> Arthur Clune wrote:
>>
>> On 29 Sep 2006, at 12:32, Jan Tobias Muehlberg wrote:
>>
>>>> I'm seeing something similar, just looks like some people are   
>>>> using
>>>> old (expired) keys.
>
> Surely the keys Stephen listed are simply without an expiry date set.
>

I didn't write that. Stephen did.


>>>
>>> Valid:
>>
>> I don't have your (Stephen's) key and it's not on the keyserver.
>
> I've just imported Stephen's key from hkp://subkeys.pgp.net OK
>

$ gpg --recv-key   
0x5950E716B416F0DE                                       13:58:42
gpg: requesting key B416F0DE from hkp server wwwkeys.pgp.net
gpgkeys: key 5950E716B416F0DE not found on keyserver
gpg: no valid OpenPGP data found.
gpg: Total number processed: 0


>>
>> Jan's email show as bad signature for me.
>
> All these show as Good Signatures for me.

rode:~/Desktop 555: gpg --verify mime-attachment ~/Desktop/ 
signatures2.rtfd/TXT.rtf                    14:04:55
gpg: Signature made Fri Sep 29 12:28:17 2006 BST using DSA key ID  
5BC905EC
gpg: BAD signature from "Jan Tobias Muehlberg <muehlber at fh- 
brandenburg.de>"
rode:~/Desktop 556:

That's what my mail client thinks as well. Odd.

So that's two people that see it as broken? And two that see it as fine?

Arthur

-- 
Arthur Clune arthur at clune.org
Electronic infomation tampers with your mind. Babylon Zoo


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/york/attachments/20060929/b20b3384/PGP.bin