d3/8df69159d84739807b45493649becafc457715

   1 Return-Path: <jrollins@finestructure.net>\r
   2 X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
   3 Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
   4 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
   5         by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 757AC431FB6\r
   6         for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:56:51 -0800 (PST)\r
   7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
   8 X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
   9 X-Spam-Score: -2.29\r
  10 X-Spam-Level: \r
  11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.29 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
  12         tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] autolearn=disabled\r
  13 Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
  14         by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
  15         with ESMTP id 3P8a1ahW1LIE for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
  16         Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:56:50 -0800 (PST)\r
  17 Received: from brinza.cc.columbia.edu (brinza.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.8])\r
  18         by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7F74431FB5\r
  19         for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:56:49 -0800 (PST)\r
  20 Received: from servo.finestructure.net (cpe-76-89-193-156.socal.res.rr.com\r
  21         [76.89.193.156] (may be forged))\r
  22         (user=jgr2110 author=jrollins@servo.finestructure.net mech=PLAIN\r
  23         bits=0)\r
  24         by brinza.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p1SJugd8006677\r
  25         (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT);\r
  26         Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:56:44 -0500 (EST)\r
  27 Received: from jrollins by servo.finestructure.net with local (Exim 4.72)\r
  28         (envelope-from <jrollins@finestructure.net>)\r
  29         id 1Pu9Cz-00057i-Qh; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:56:41 -0800\r
  30 From: Jameson Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>\r
  31 To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>,\r
  32         notmuch <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
  33 Subject: Re: [Review] Re: new "crypto" branch providing full PGP/MIME support\r
  34 In-Reply-To: <4D6BF0AA.3070706@fifthhorseman.net>\r
  35 References: <4CF15D67.1070904@fifthhorseman.net>\r
  36         <87aak08fu8.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
  37         <87fwsf9mip.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
  38         <87tygl29vu.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
  39         <87oc5yi9us.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
  40         <87d3mdvjwz.fsf@bookbinder.fernseed.info>\r
  41         <87k4gk70ng.fsf@SSpaeth.de>\r
  42         <87sjv8i7v6.fsf@irigaray.ross.mayfirst.org>\r
  43         <87sjv86mp9.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
  44         <4D6BF0AA.3070706@fifthhorseman.net>\r
  45 User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-127-g598108c (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1\r
  46         (i486-pc-linux-gnu)\r
  47 Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:56:38 -0800\r
  48 Message-ID: <874o7o6ih5.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
  49 MIME-Version: 1.0\r
  50 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";\r
  51         micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"\r
  52 X-No-Spam-Score: Local\r
  53 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 128.59.29.8\r
  54 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
  55 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
  56 Precedence: list\r
  57 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
  58         <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
  59 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
  60         <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
  61 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
  62 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
  63 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
  64 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
  65         <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
  66 X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:56:51 -0000\r
  67 \r
  68 --=-=-=\r
  69 \r
  70 On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:59:54 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> wrote:\r
  71 > But: what does the "signed" tag mean? i wouldn't want to necessarily\r
  72 > conflate these four ideas:\r
  73 \r
  74 These are good points, Daniel.  However, I had actually just been\r
  75 thinking of something much simpler, along the lines of just tagging\r
  76 "signed" any message with a "multipart/signed" part, and "encrypted" any\r
  77 message with a "multipart/encrypted" part.\r
  78 \r
  79 This simpler approach would certainly satisfy my needs, without having\r
  80 to get into sorting out all the complicated details in the points you\r
  81 brought up.\r
  82 \r
  83 Does that sound like it would work for folks, or would they like to see\r
  84 a more nuanced approach to handling tagging of signed/encrypted\r
  85 messages?\r
  86 \r
  87 jamie.\r
  88 \r
  89 --=-=-=\r
  90 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature\r
  91 \r
  92 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
  93 Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)\r
  94 \r
  95 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJNa/32AAoJEO00zqvie6q8nicP/jdp4q040q9lrX0JukI5aYlB\r
  96 trcLMr1zi6qfAJWjM39ZtIUyY1Y1KVVnK8yiRrNGJawwqbhGdogSwHvzpGKkiYlM\r
  97 eU5GUQ+L3bbSxkIXxI2Db+maucIjaCGWtMdPA0CgoMz6v2T3wgLABNlTl5w/XTTJ\r
  98 DFf/uNKgkNEp6o95XRhP7kEkVS07yedBH/OisDz0NjAqcVkfxRS0P4GFBqGQOyEv\r
  99 ebbCxArEBnDhEPKA/OJniiyZ20U3nzKUKrJ6BSxV2/PYBulbD3FGoGzlUIPKHuMf\r
 100 wbUPpFCF/q/u2V6zmg3BpQEg+dj1PyD9SON8pdWBkeVQBDc2TgcW28neC0CClPw8\r
 101 EC0dK86ZmSmnBZneeTXWc/z8gjAEu9perv0WihvBGstP7VbHYzWH7B5dZ/UDWBRO\r
 102 7pnQK3izCJd9WChE83I89E0jEvqD2ZmB73Vmu9n3BGfYLRsHjWZ8eb9Gyl9RV+eB\r
 103 3Xrvl4ubB6GbQL/7IYB48U4AtYFr1NGn9O+WTdy1yh6Gm0OpifeMS6vB0Q+gMdqN\r
 104 Gs1w6DX/IjoUlbiOuuj/7V7jeMyy3CCscX7vMwpYC70Hr5ioyUGfr0WATGPaLZOu\r
 105 DUGrFmzRu5g8Q8K2Td5fpdsZJlCxuH4gQIL8xjeCX1R+CcWfWopBqZV+zHl/oWwJ\r
 106 h80Xo1t6/3XFN3qN3Efb\r
 107 =UxjG\r
 108 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
 109 --=-=-=--\r