Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Michael's PGP Signature - Re: Fsuk-manchester Digest, Vol 36, Issue 3

[Pater Mann]

Andrew Gladwell wrote:
> it's still 18 lines at the end of each of Michael's messages that none
> of us really needs to see.

Signatures provide two main benefits:

1. They positively identify the sender. Anyone can send an unsigned
email pretending to be Michael but the signature proves that it was
sent by Michael not an imposter.

2. Because it contains a hash, verifying the signature also proves
that the message has not been changed en-route. Because it may pass
through several mail servers before it is posted to the list, even if
the original was sent by Michael, the email could be changed after it
was sent. It could get corrupted or it could be intercepted by someone
with malicious intent and modified to say something very different.

Please note that I am not suggesting that anyone would impersonate
Michael or change his messages but it is possible!

> On the other hand, it's just the way Michael's
> software works and it cannot be changed then I shan't make a fuss over it.

I am sure Michael does not have to sign his emails - he chooses to do
so because of the above benefits.

Hope this helps.

patermann