Digital Signing (Beat The Dead Horse) was Re: Free Software for m$

[Tom Achtenberg]

You are correct, I left off the "Express".  I just do not see any value in
the signing.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Derek Neighbors" <derek@gnue.org>
To: <plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 11:36 PM
Subject: Digital Signing (Beat The Dead Horse) was Re: Free Software for m$


On Tue, 2002-09-24 at 21:13, Tom Achtenberg wrote:
> I am using Outlook 6.  I haven't a clue what you mean by "RFC compliant".

I assume you mean Outlook Express 6?  I am not updated on M$ products
but I think that Outlook only has 97, 98, 2000, XP.  RFC is a standard
that people agree upon, M$ just happens to be a vendor that often
decides to agree, but not implement.  Also, embrace an RFC and extend it
is popular as well, but thats another debate.

Certainly the email client I am using could be at fault, I really dont
pay all that much attention.  I havent had anyone else not be able to
read my mail though (which is what made me suspect), but certainly I
wont point fingers at one email client over another with a clear
conscience without all the facts.  I just havent had the best of luck w/
m$ clients munging things.  Winmail.dat is a perfect example of this....

> In a commercial situation I can see signing some messages.  To always sign
> all only adds needless overhead and bandwidth usage.

I think you are confusing encrypting with signing.  Signing has lots of
value in any setting and generally uses less bandwidth than many of the
non RFC compliant sigs floating around (I think JLF has a link to the
RFC for sigs ;))

In addition, I think I saw a mail from this thread (I think coming from
you) that took the time (and precious bandwidth) to inform me that the
mail was sent virus free and that I need not worry.  Funny seeing how
the operating system I use is generally immune to the virii that product
is looking for, and I would argue what is the value in 'ensuring me that
the mail is clean and free of virus'? Again this is another offshoot and
just an observation.

Again I will repeat, if this list is anti-digital signature, I will
gladly not sign messages to this list.  If they have no opinion on the
matter or encourage it, I will continue to sign messages in hopes of
enlightening others to PGP and helping ensure people can trust things
they get from me are really from me in the original format.


--
Derek Neighbors
GNU Enterprise
http://www.gnuenterprise.org
derek@gnue.org

Was I helpful?  Let others know:
 http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=dneighbo

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.391 / Virus Database: 222 - Release Date: 9/19/2002