Internic and PGP
David Shaw
dshaw at jabberwocky.com
Wed Mar 31 19:01:26 UTC 1999
On Tue, Mar 30, 1999 at 10:49:35PM -0500, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 1999 at 07:31:24PM -0800, J.D. Falk wrote:
> > I don't think it's ever been officially announced as down,
> > but they'd admit there were problems if you called.
>
> If they ever did, you know, that might affect their stock
> price. Can't do that. Not with the money grubbing higher-ups ;)
>
> I've found that the way that mutt supports pgp, doesn't work
> right with their template processing stuff, so you have
> to pgp -sa the file then e-mail it in for it to work. They've not lost
> my key (that i'm aware of), and only returned templates I sent with
> the mutt pgp stuff, but not with the ELM2.4 ME+ (that works correctly).
I have gone to silly lengths to ensure that I am giving them a valid
signature. Once I signed the template, and then verified the signature. I
then copied it to another machine with a different PGP version and
re-verified the signature. Then I mailed it to myself off-site and
verified the signature on the remote system to ensure the mail system
wasn't breaking something. Finally, I mailed it to
hostmaster at internic.net and cc'd myself on and off-site. Both copies I
got back verified fine. The Internic took a few days and then bounced it
because they couldn't verify the signature.
David
--
David Shaw | dshaw at jabberwocky.com | WWW http://www.jabberwocky.com/
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
"There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX.
We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson
More information about the NANOG
mailing list