Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to the Power Users community on Codidact!

Power Users is a Q&A site for questions about the usage of computer software and hardware. We are still a small site and would like to grow, so please consider joining our community. We are looking forward to your questions and answers; they are the building blocks of a repository of knowledge we are building together.

Post History

66%
+2 −0
Q&A Why might a PGP-signed email be considered less secure than the same message without a signature?

It's impossible to know for certain without examining the precise rules used by the IT department's spam filtering system, but we can probably make some sensible guesses. It is unlikely (although ...

posted 1y ago by InfiniteDissent‭

Answer
#1: Initial revision by user avatar InfiniteDissent‭ · 2025-08-28T13:16:33Z (about 1 year ago)
It's impossible to know for certain without examining the precise rules used by the IT department's spam filtering system, but we can probably make some sensible guesses.

It is **unlikely** (although not impossible) that the IT system cares about the validity of the PGP signature, or is even bothering to check it, for a couple of reasons:

 * The use of PGP-signed email is extremely niche, and mostly limited to open-source crypto enthusiasts (the only time I've seen PGP-signed emails is on Linux User Group mailing lists, and even then it was only a handful of people on a list with dozens of members). Therefore there is little motivation to integrate PGP functionality into a spam-detection system.
 * It's an extra computational step the system has to perform while processing many thousands of messages every day (although most of those messages won't be signed, for the above reason).
 * The validity of a PGP signature establishes nothing about whether the email is spam. Any spammer can create their own PGP key, upload it to some key servers and start signing their emails.

What spam filters **do** often care about is attachments.

Assuming your PGP-enabled mail client is set up to send signed emails using the [modern PGP/Mime format](https://www.phildev.net/pgp/pgp_clear_vs_mime.html), rather than the largely deprecated inline format, then the signature will be attached as a separate part of a multi-part MIME message, using the content type `application/pgp-signature`. This is in addition to the attachment you explicitly sent, so your resulting message now has two attachments instead of one, which might be enough to push it above the threshold for being marked as spam.