[LBo] inline vs. attachment signature

[Billy Pollifrone]

Brian Reichert wrote:
> I've been sort of surface following this thread on E-mail encryption and =
it
> seems there is a great bit of confusion.  Instead of trying to sound like=
 an
> expert, which I am not, I think I'll just provide a list of links that I =
found
> useful.

Nice job. You touched just about everything. Someone mentioned in an
earlier post about inline vs. attachment for the signature. Inline is
deprecated. There is a problem however in that Outlook (Express) doesn't
know what to do with the PGP/Mime attachment and then doesn't display
the body of the message correctly. If I send where I'm likely to know
that they are not using Windows, such as this list, then I use the
attachment. If I have a doubt and someone may be using OE, and I
actually want them to read it and not throw it in the trash I have to
inline the signature.

-- =

(o_  Billy Pollifrone
//\  billy AT silverbaseball DOT com
V_/_ Registered Linux User #433318 (http://counter.li.org)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://linuxbasics.org/pipermail/qna/attachments/20070325/ac64817f/si=
gnature-0001.pgp