From: Bryce <wilcoxb@nagina.cs.colorado.edu>
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 1996 06:01:36 +0800
To: e$@thumper.vmeng.com, cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: bad PGP signatures
In-Reply-To: <v02120d0aad1db01de3b4@[199.0.65.105]>
Message-ID: <199601132149.OAA28011@nagina.cs.colorado.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Yet another bad PGP signature via e$pam.

Date: Sat, 13 Jan 1996 12:13:03 +0600
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
From: "David K. Merriman" <merriman@arn.net>
Subject: Re: Digital postage and remailer abuse


That's the third today (although the second was fixable by 
concatenating the Subject: onto one line.)  Would everyone 
please get into the habit of formatting their messages to be 
much less than 80 columns?  All Phil's travails are ill-
rewarded when we can't get basic clearsigning to work via 
mailing lists.  (Or if we don't bother to *use* clearsigning 
via mailing lists, but that is another topic...)


On a related subject, cpunks traffic recently alerted me to how
effective replay attacks can be against PGP.  Don't PGP
signatures include a time-stamp from the system clock?  I'm 
going to get into the habit of including a time-stamp in the
clear-text from now on.  (I have sent so many PGP-clearsigned
messages, and many of them quite short, that an attacker could
almost hold up my end of a conversation using them.  :-) )


Bryce

PGP sig follows


Sat Jan 13 14:48:23 MST 1996


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Auto-signed under Unix with 'BAP' Easy-PGP v1.01

iQCVAwUBMPgoy/WZSllhfG25AQGGlgP9HhxLLpfrsyTBc8ed9jjToJnUOl37S+3z
8zac6FJXk+3dsKhXe2UhiKQrLDx6wIodvy+6DkpBNEEWuzkaVlRkZ9QFiDIuKkm2
ixc8HaZ6yJQLKg5NX19vStpwyQGsDx9tCVAM8BtEYXHuzVqb7AuANVmS/EJWd5js
yz+pz6COpxE=
=PzVY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----