From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0FCE40DADD for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:44:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.89 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i7+ajeeWQKuV for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:44:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from tarap.cc.columbia.edu (tarap.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.7]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D21A40DBFA for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:44:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from servo.finestructure.net (pool-108-27-62-5.nycmny.fios.verizon.net [108.27.62.5]) (user=jgr2110 author=jrollins@finestructure.net mech=PLAIN bits=0) by tarap.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oAGKiFrM008663 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:44:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from jrollins by servo.finestructure.net with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PISNz-0005QE-MI; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:44:15 -0500 From: Jameson Rollins To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor , notmuch Subject: Re: a proposed change to JSON output to report verification of PGP/MIME signatures. In-Reply-To: <4CE2E819.1070808@fifthhorseman.net> References: <4CDE4486.2050101@fifthhorseman.net> <87hbfhdpa6.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> <87wrod9gh8.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> <4CE2E819.1070808@fifthhorseman.net> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1 (i486-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:44:14 -0500 Message-ID: <87sjz19ext.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-No-Spam-Score: Local X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 128.59.29.7 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 20:44:29 -0000 --=-=-= On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:22:49 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > For clients that do not know how to interpret/display the verification > results, i don't want the backend to incur the cost of verification that > will be thrown away. Aren't clients going to have to interpret/display the output regardless of it's been verified or not? It seems to me that understanding how to display the verified output is really not that much more difficult than understanding how to display the unverified output. jamie. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJM4u0eAAoJEO00zqvie6q8qu0QALAeMyFHlhMQXaoayzwlcQkO 2MfOPEPZm6bzd4DORAZ0a+L/gf95tM82VMYIO3HFpIT+H4+DFSbfWaR42ilQb555 sPKZwMtv3DVw6YQ/s1EkX6IJeDWGpR32SxHEVrTbi0wEAeq11O9sIpbHse1iTp8z CU2s8wZqgTrW2xs/3dAR0CU7PewCYEi3yR7O0AHqInEPsWbI5aH71R7Nz58NE+R1 4KfnkNdSK36WTBoDMTNomi4DNVpSfRgS8S0+UkiTm/8mnSIX7e4EXKVxpKNrBZyp dI5hUSWcNamFYJlSWeE9ZsDCi82zWAYg5fys8QWeWfDHw+HxTM2o/h4asMIcrZm7 FNG/tM3F20l6+bfttmH8ecjsVFaKv0/yuitOg75n8i3v+a2Y2GCEUfXdiHG6pROC G8nC6rfCEuAuf5SiRE2zIyYLw5Fc1jF3wP5w4HvykYJCjoY8gyQNkK/j2PBEykS/ 4RiuUIR2gZUDzqgojF3kEbajryDvGt+wYbHmc0CFG/pGbDLkkoA8I/O3FccSyj+l mH8Tzzy+M+0P8I7Jo5RG2J59NiBmI/MTEsuVhYx2jWea1bWA//VGgAC4pXuLpi6V 6YyZ7RaJH3VKhb7hV9OGLMQrEkTiPoHRKWQB6ePWn8j6M+pqh66+bo08h8s5RWJC R7QHvS96FyMn/JW14UsC =lb1E -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--