Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: ADMIN: PGP Most Likely Unusable on LISTSERV
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 1994 00:00:38 -0500
I had talked about a couple days ago using PGP to sign my messages, but
repeated problems with the signature not matching lead me to the writers
of LISTSERV to find out what the problem was. This is what I got.

------<forwarded message #1 >------
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 1994 15:27:50 +0200
From: name removed as this is forwarded without permission
Subject: Re: PGP

Messages get sent through gateways that may make all sorts of minor
transformations to the message text. It's just not realistic to implement
a digital signature technique that does not at least ignore added/removed
white space.

------<forwarded message #2 >------
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 94 09:17:33 PDT
From: name removed as this is forwarded without permission
To: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Re: PGP

Well, your system sends 'ASCII', while LISTSERV uses 'EBCDIC',
and some users translate the received-text back to 'ASCII'.
That's *TWO* translations, with a large leap-of-faith that
the two translations are 1-to-1.

Because of this, I'm afraid that I cannot reliably rely on PGP to
authenticate my postings, thus I'm not going to waste bandwidth with a
lot of noise.

In the future, if an ADMIN message seems suspect, contact me direct and I
will verify if I sent it.

I apologize for the hassles.

____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@*******
\ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=-
\/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Political Correctness is
\/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> P.C. for "Thought Police"
(GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about ADMIN: PGP Most Likely Unusable on LISTSERV, you may also be interested in:


These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.