From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2luC-0004qW-R9 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 19:43:20 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org designates 62.13.148.108 as permitted sender) client-ip=62.13.148.108; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org; helo=outmail148108.authsmtp.net; Received: from outmail148108.authsmtp.net ([62.13.148.108]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1Z2luB-00041C-QO for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 19:43:20 +0000 Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235]) by punt15.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t5AJhCQB030382; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 20:43:12 +0100 (BST) Received: from savin.petertodd.org (75-119-251-161.dsl.teksavvy.com [75.119.251.161]) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t5AJh1Tv084852 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 10 Jun 2015 20:43:04 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 15:43:01 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: Andy Schroder Message-ID: <20150610194301.GC21416@savin.petertodd.org> References: <1943127.DBnVxmfOIh@1337h4x0r> <20150610093556.GA11409@amethyst.visucore.com> <557869F9.8030109@AndySchroder.com> <557883A7.7030906@sky-ip.org> <55788924.6090008@AndySchroder.com> <20150610190320.GA1229@savin.petertodd.org> <55788C02.1010105@AndySchroder.com> <20150610192004.GB21416@savin.petertodd.org> <557891CA.5010708@AndySchroder.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="OBd5C1Lgu00Gd/Tn" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <557891CA.5010708@AndySchroder.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Server-Quench: e91839b2-0fa8-11e5-b396-002590a15da7 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aAdMdwIUEkAaAgsB AmMbWVReVF57WWc7 bA9PbARUfEhLXhtr VklWR1pVCwQmRRlw fEYfNl9yfwFOfXw+ bEFnVz4OVUVydk8v QFNUQzwOeGZhPWUC AkNRcR5UcAFPdx8U a1UrBXRDAzANdhES HhM4ODE3eDlSNilR RRkIIFQOdA4qBXYH QA0YFjgBGlcKSm0o Mx0iLhYABlsKLlo1 K0chSBoVNRgPBQ0W A0YvSC9ePEVJWyoq FkteXFUCR1UA X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 75.119.251.161/587 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.0 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address X-Headers-End: 1Z2luB-00041C-QO Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Is SourceForge still trustworthy enough to host this list? X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 19:43:20 -0000 --OBd5C1Lgu00Gd/Tn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 03:36:42PM -0400, Andy Schroder wrote: > It's possible that the enigmail extension is not working right, but > I was under the impression that it is just feeding data to gpg and > then receiving the response back. It's possible that your e-mail you > just checked was not sent through mailman since I also replied > directly to you explicitly (in which case the message has not been > modified) and you probably have the setting in the mailing list set > to not send duplicate messages if you are an explicit TO. I just > deleted all explicit TOs for this message, so everyone should be > receiving it through the mailing list and not directly. Is the > signature still valid for you now? I think enigmail can handle It has perfectly valid signatures, as do your earlier messages to the list. > messages with some signed and unsigned content, and maybe PGP/MIME > inherently does not support this and a mailing list re-writing parts > of messages is an expected action? If this message re-writing is an > expected action and I'm correct that PGP/MIME does not support > partially signed content, then maybe it is just a recommendation for > this mailing list to not use PGP/MIME for messages sent to the list? PGP/MIME definitely does support partially signed content. --=20 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000000000000000009e865d07f75341a5f3dc15f0e149055a241eedd552c3b88 --OBd5C1Lgu00Gd/Tn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGrBAEBCACVBQJVeJNBXhSAAAAAABUAQGJsb2NraGFzaEBiaXRjb2luLm9yZzAw MDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwOWU4NjVkMDdmNzUzNDFhNWYzZGMxNWYwZTE0OTA1NWEy NDFlZWRkNTUyYzNiODgvFIAAAAAAFQARcGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3JncGV0 ZUBwZXRlcnRvZC5vcmcACgkQJIFAPaXwkftl0QgAqBQkoMXJh8hfoi1s68ECaYan c+6Z/iGmpretuCrY3nJGQo9+ut5FI3kcfJMeo/GG3rjB6wf8LT+j5l8iW2vReYVW CDpXDeGrvTYTxCF+/KVJ26iaFC1zDZonu/Dm1pOoGzrL3cQ8LaIoYSk+A2Xx+Kpw sC+a09pEnFnZuQ2dkfAuzvKjF4/PG9+kQ8mLPd+IWLC/dmAwc/9PDMo7g8JrRsJI 1zq6VfjEcbgo7QfZWnOvWecnMhHrq1WlE8C7wbXtJSxSRpY/Qa53/9vDiVqYMIaw meJ0yNtCBRPqQ2z1UtLFM6wSRJ3HThIgwRt+kykVxkAz/TFVwWIhM52ZR1ce5w== =Ufio -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --OBd5C1Lgu00Gd/Tn--