| Eugene Smiley on 25 Jan 2005 05:03:36 -0000 |
|
Tom Diehl wrote: > Do you mean this article? > http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_05/b3918001_mz001.ht > m?campaign_id=nws_insdr_jan21&link_position=link1 > Yeah, that's the one. I'll admit I tried to find it on the website but didn't try hard enough. Thanks for the link. > <RANT> > Sorry for the lack of quoting. Quoting was lost due to the OP need > > to pgp sign a message to a public mailing list. Why I will never > understand but... > </RANT> Because, I think it's PRETTY? Not really.PGP has three primary uses: Confidentiality - When using encryption. Integrity - Has the message been changed in route? Authentication - Is this person who they say the are? Conversely, non-repudiation is included in this. Someone who signed a message can't say that they didn't send it since it is signed with their key. You could turn around, fabricate a story and say that someone hacked your email account add sent the above message without your knowing it. It's unsigned no one could prove otherwise. I can't; mine is signed. As are most of my messages in the archives of this list. I could understand your complaint if it were about my sending an encrypted message to the list. That would be stupid. You CAN give me grief, however, about the fact that I double signed the message (which I try not to do). The message has an S/MIME sig that I usually don't send to mailing lists due to the size of S/MIME which sends a copy of the public with every message. Attachment:
smime.p7s ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|