1996-06-25 - Re: Bad Signatures

Header Data

From: geoff@commtouch.co.il (geoff)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 52984b8ed0293b1fd017ca4a038cc6a811ad8293d0ee33b1d204694de665d09f
Message ID: <19960624094226014.AAA227@geoff.commtouch.co.il>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-06-25 05:30:57 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 13:30:57 +0800

Raw message

From: geoff@commtouch.co.il (geoff)
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 13:30:57 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Bad Signatures
Message-ID: <19960624094226014.AAA227@geoff.commtouch.co.il>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


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

To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Date: Mon Jun 24 12:48:55 1996

Thanks to all list members who responded on this issue.

The consensus is that bouncing bad signatures to the list is not a 
good idea.

In the interest of reducing the number of bad signatures caused by 
munging which appear on the list, I will continue to bounce messages 
with bad signatures to the originator only.

Thanks,

Geoff Klein.






-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBMc5WeELv5OMYFK1FAQEiAAP/fr0+Z1dmGfuRgiGqir9396+DSJ+eBquS
0JM9FxtMvZwyCsafsJSwZSHBPWtLanaAzFMgO5SigWSki6hP3sP/ywrH0qni480U
7d0CG9gz2g2N6pYAjE8nhFT26NUVFBvm/csPod+3W71/vvg/KP3vRas2fWRqRzQY
wEV2g4aaTII=
=rh71
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






Thread