Theo v. Werkhoven [2003-03-22 09:31]:
So the last bit ("However, PGP 6.58 fails to verify your sig.") was
Rex's.
Theo, I'm getting a bad sig message from PGP:
[-- PGP output follows (current time: Sat 22 Mar 2003 12:15:03 PM PST) --]
WARNING: Bad signature, doesn't match file contents!
Bad signature from user "Theo v. Werkhoven (Usenet and personal mail) ".
Pretty Good Privacy(tm) Version 6.5.8
[...]
[-- End of PGP output --]
I emailed you about it (your key shows as expired in PGP), but your ISP is
blocking mail from dialup IP ranges:
Error 571: ACCESS DENIED by Wirehub! Internet DynaBlock
a.k.a. Dynamic IP range listed by Wirehub! Internet DynaBlock (Nederlands)
The only dynamically assigned IP addresses (esp. dynamically assigned
dial-up connections) our mail servers want to talk to are our own. Plain and
simple. You're not accused of being a spammer, but the fact is that spammers
prefer to use dial-up connections to send unwanted e-mail. If you feel
victimized by this, you're a victim of the spamming industry, just like we
are.
This makes about as much sense as not allowing anyone on a bus who pays
cash because a few people who pay cash cause problems.
It's quite disappointing to see that signing/encryption failures are so
common after public key encryption has been in use for so long (I started
using PGP in 1994 and used another public-key encryption program before
that). It's bad enough when the parties can communicate openly, but it's
much worse when remailers and pseudonyms are used.
-rex