[sylpheed:36022] Re: GnuPG Support: Encrypt to self in Sent Items

Tim Drub tim.drub at hacky.eu
Fri Mar 7 07:33:24 JST 2014

On 2014-03-06 18:35, Javier wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2014 17:27:52 +0000
> Paul <claws at thewildbeast.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Thu, 6 Mar 2014 18:24:34 +0100
>> Javier <meresponde2001-sylpheed at yahoo.es> wrote:
>> > Actually, PGP-MIME is a recommendation by OpenPGP to ensure easy 
>> of
>> > use, interoperability and standards. It's better? I wouldn't judge
>> > it but not necessarily.
>> >

Well, I guess PGP/Mime is the way to go today as it is the 
recommendation. I do would say that many smaller problems are addressed 
by it that inline couldn't really solve.

>> Attach some files to a message and then sign the message.
>> With PGP-MIME your attachments are signed, with PGP-Inline they are
>> not.
> that doesn't guarantee security but easy of use. We ever signed files
> appending signatures or attaching along the signed file and no
> problems.
> What is the deal now? Isn't more or less secure whether signed
> through PGP-MIME or not.

Anyway, I didn't want to start a discussion about what is the better of 
the two. I was just wondering why inline support in Sylpheed is 
incomplete. Sending ASCII armored works but receiving such messages are 
not recognized as being encrypted.

I found ten year old mailing list entries on this issue. Even 
workarounds with what was called Sylpheed Actions at the time, that do 
not work anymore today as this feature has disappeared (maybe it always 
was Linux only, dunno). I would have thought this was solved by now, but 
it seems as not.


More information about the Sylpheed mailing list