We obviously have the web extension, though I haven't seen any updates there recently either.
But I'm not sure what native would look like. After Lavabit, would the type of folks who use pgp actually trust our implementation if they couldn't see it and verify it? Also, the spam problem becomes challenging in that environment... On Sep 2, 2016 5:15 PM, <valdis.kletni...@vt.edu> wrote: > On Fri, 02 Sep 2016 14:27:39 -0400, Jim Popovitch said: > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:28 AM, Brandon Long via mailop > > <mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > > > The spam team would love to send all unauthed mail to the spam label > or even > > > reject it (they call it no auth no entry). > > > I'd love to see "no auth no entry", but I'd prefer to see native PGP. > ;-) > > Only if you agree to handle all the support calls regarding web-of-trust. > :) > > (This is a major problem for deploying e-mail crypto at scale - > http://pgp.cs.uu.nl/plot/ says the strongly connected set in the > web-of-trust > is right around 60,000 keys - which amounts to about 0.001% of the world > population. You want PGP to take off, you need to find a sane way for the > *other* 99.999% of the population to do keys correctly....) > >
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
