[Enigmail] Expect signature header proposal

[Robert J. Hansen]

Faramir wrote:
> I think _maybe_ Eitan Adler is just trying to explain his idea, since
> probably he still think it would be an interesting feature, and if 
> people is rejecting it, maybe it is because they have misunderstood
> what he is suggesting.

We understand it just fine.  The problem is that he doesn't.

Schneier has a saying, "everyone can make a cipher they can't break, but
few can make a cipher nobody can break."  The same applies to code.
Everybody knows how to sling code, apparently, judging by the amount of
backseat driving Patrick gets.  However, I can tell you precisely how
many useful patches Patrick has received in the last few years... it's
less than five.

> we don't know if there is a big difference between the recipient's
> rules to sign/encrypt messages, and to add a feature about "sender's
> rules".

In the Southeast United States (what's commonly called "the South")
there's a tradition of inviting the neighbors over for barbecue.  South
Africans may take as much pride in their barbecue as an American
Southerner, but it'd be close.  Barbecue is governed by some simple and
straightforward social rules: if you're drinking a man's beer and eating
his barbecue, you're not allowed to talk about how your barbecue is
tastier or how you have better taste in beer.

If you want to do that, you can.  Next weekend invite your neighbors
over and show them how it's done.  It's that simple.

Now, with respect to Enigmail... it's Patrick's place.  It's his
barbecue.  It's good stuff.  I, and many others, really like it.

If someone wants to say "why don't you put more hickory in the
barbecue?", we'll explain it to them.  Maybe it would upset the delicate
balance of flavors.  Maybe the extra hickory smoke would make the meat
taste better, but would ruin the fish Patrick is grilling.

We'll explain this stuff until we're blue in the face.  We like
answering these questions.

But if someone comes up and says "look, it's so obvious, put more
hickory in the barbecue!", well -- that's just tacky.  We'll still
explain things politely.  But when we get greeted with "no, you're wrong
and I'm right, and you should put more hickory in the barbecue!",
well... at that point we think you should go off and cook your own.  If
it turns out to be a success, we hope you'll invite us over.

> An alert icon would be a nice aid to make me to remind that policy,
> *if* such feature is not too complex to implement.

We cannot do this in a way which is any of (a) effective, (b) secure or
(c) easy.  If you'd like me to elaborate on those, I'd be happy to.  :)