Re: PGP Signing and Encryption
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Marck, Only encrypted signed messages will result in a decrypted version. Ah, so it does. I was keying CTRL-SHIFT-D for signed messages, instead of CTRL-SHIFT-C. If it were decrypted in-line then you really would lose that opportunity since the original message would be replaced with the decrypted version. By in-line what I was really trying to say is on-the-fly - TB! should always store the message as it was received. So if I received a signed message and want it displayed in the viewer TB! would do it's best to check the signature automatically. Similarly with encrypted messages, if I have a cached passphrase in PGP then there is nothing to stop TB! decrypting the message for me when I open it in the viewer. There should, of course, always be a way to view the message as it was originally transmitted if you are interested in that. For me it's the manual intervention on every message that is signed or encrypted that makes it feel less integrated. BTW, if unattended security is of concern to you then you should seriously consider using SecureBat! It's not a major concern for me, just an example of why I'm not so keen on the decrypted copies of messages. If TB! was decrypting as it went the PGP passphrase caching would alleviate this problem to some degree. Thanks for your response, I will give that example Read filter a try. Regards, Graeme. - -- Graeme J Hosking [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hosking-online.com/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0xCA4E46C2 iQA/AwUBPhQizWG9Y2LKTkbCEQIKPwCg+U7/k8df/Tbla6CcLyVjwEoulcMAoKzs /mHBcxXsjXJ0Qw9cVIJh2J4h =WFf9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
PGP Signing and Encryption
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I'm just starting to get my head around using PGP with The Bat! but I'm not entirely sure I have this set up correctly. I've installed PGP 6.5.8ckt and The Bat! seems to work with it reasonably. However, every time I ask for a signature to be verified, or a message to be decrypted, I get a duplicate of the message with (PGP Decrypted) appended to the subject. Is it really supposed to do that? It seems to me to be slightly less than elegant, but given that I'm new to PGP I'm willing to accept there might be a good reason for doing this (I just can't see it :-). I was expecting messages to be verified or decrypted in-line, so to speak, making use of the PGP passphrase caching. Making decrypted copies of a message that anyone passing my workstation can read when I'm not around seems to go against the objective of increasing privacy, IMO. Which is why I'm wondering if I've missed anything? Graeme. - -- Graeme J Hosking [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hosking-online.com/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ Comment: KeyID: 0xCA4E46C2 iQA/AwUBPhOYgGG9Y2LKTkbCEQINygCg33JdwV9533GZKbfQFCxuHwXq9dEAoI9s tql1TwVLsj18VPwhyK5zrGg0 =Uw/B -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: PGP Signing and Encryption
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Graeme, @2-Jan-2003, 01:40 Graeme J Hosking [GJH] in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: GJH However, every time I ask for a signature to be verified, or a GJH message to be decrypted, I get a duplicate of the message with GJH (PGP Decrypted) appended to the subject. Is it really GJH supposed to do that? Yes - for decryption. Only encrypted signed messages will result in a decrypted version. Signature verification will result in the appearance of the PGP Log window containing the results of the verification. With the later ckt builds (09 beta 3 for instance) the result of the verification process is loaded into the clipboard ready to be pasted back into a response. GJH It seems to me to be slightly less than elegant, but given that GJH I'm new to PGP I'm willing to accept there might be a good GJH reason for doing this (I just can't see it :-). The reason is that the decryption is intended to be temporary - for viewing purposes only. I employ Read message filters to delete decrypted messages automatically after reading. I also employ special macros to enforce encryption and to remove the Decrypted from the subject when replying. GJH I was expecting messages to be verified or decrypted in-line, GJH so to speak, making use of the PGP passphrase caching. Making GJH decrypted copies of a message that anyone passing my GJH workstation can read when I'm not around seems to go against GJH the objective of increasing privacy, IMO. Which is why I'm GJH wondering if I've missed anything? Only deleting the decrypted version once read. If it were decrypted in-line then you really would lose that opportunity since the original message would be replaced with the decrypted version. S/MIME messages are actually handled more as you describe. BTW, if unattended security is of concern to you then you should seriously consider using SecureBat! - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 ' -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1rc1-nr1 (Windows 2000) iD8DBQE+E5p5OeQkq5KdzaARAqffAKCkOlMlQhBCiJ1ackrFpvFB8HqW4gCgouiW op2CiE+9rvdh7Z6ljwPScFQ= =XQjN -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: PGP Signing and Encryption
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: MD5 Hi Marck, MDP The reason is that the decryption is intended to be temporary - for MDP viewing purposes only. I employ Read message filters to delete MDP decrypted messages automatically after reading. I also employ MDP special macros to enforce encryption and to remove the Decrypted MDP from the subject when replying. would you consider sharing some of those macros with the newbies - meaning myself ;) - on the list who've yet to really play with this kind of functionailty? cheers, Toby --- Life is poetry - write it in your own words. --- Toby Tremayne Technical Team Lead Code Poet and Zen Master of the Heavy Sleep Toll Solutions 154 Moray St Sth Melbourne VIC 3205 +61 3 9697 2317 0416 048 090 ICQ: 13107913 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUAPhOeiUYhrxxXvPlFAQGCxgQArjKH+cwwIJue0wcCLfloGUkm+xjB5Kqv qF87O4zuPOgDYsZ0vtDZ0komAtD3SR008QE0+t+iOPxINhiHlf900pSqJ1N0zb4y ExcsgJg/Lyw9wWTDwCX69F+AfVcyKroi7UID/I8LVrlCiUI3ILTPVL63Ln5DpKtm XOldewl8gxs= =h5we -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: PGP Signing and Encryption
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Toby, @2-Jan-2003, 13:06 +1100 (02:06 UK time) Toby Tremayne [TT] in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: MDP ... I also employ special macros to enforce encryption and to MDP remove the Decrypted from the subject when replying. TT would you consider sharing some of those macros with the newbies TT - meaning myself ;) - on the list who've yet to really play with TT this kind of functionailty? Sure. Here's my QSUBJ Quick Template: %SUBJECT=Re: %SETPATTREGEXP='(?i)\A(?::?\s*)%- (?:(?:\s*(?:fwd|re|aw|fw|antwort|wg|forw)%- (?:\[\d*\])?:\s*)|(?:\s*\[.*\]\s*))*%- (.*?)(?:(?:\s*\((?:was|war):?.*\)\s*)|%- (?:\((?:PGP|S/MIME) Decrypted\)))*\z'%- %REGEXPMATCH='%OSUBJ' I use this in all my templates since it does the whole tidy up thing for all possible manglement of a subject line. It's an extrapolation of the standard one in the library I think. And here's a typical Read message filter to rid me of a decrypted copy. BeginFilter Name: Remove decrypted copy Active: 1 Source: \Inbox Target: \Inbox CopyFolder: none MainSet: 20\(PGP Decrypted\) Actions: faDelMsg,faoRegExp EndFilter Anyone who doesn't know how to use one of these - just highlight the above text including the BeginFilter and EndFilter lines and press Ctrl-C (or Right Click / choose Copy from the menu). Now open up the Sorting office and click on the Read messages folder. Now press Ctrl-V to paste the filter in. That'll do it. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 ' -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1rc1-nr1 (Windows 2000) iD8DBQE+E5/8OeQkq5KdzaARAulhAJ0d5lNAjRC1Q0KDzZp1LLz7MoL2mACfVm8b BpRykJiEwV0kdawlvear8IY= =jjz0 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: PGP Signing and Encryption
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: MD5 Hi Marck, ta muchly - I'll enjoy playing with these! Thursday, January 2, 2003, 1:12:08 PM, you wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUAPhOke0YhrxxXvPlFAQH/rQP+N83Y5QXrEM4790xagUzDv/shoSPNpdow 675WYKoktPuJau1p9wHpFpon1t5/p+ICPqyB7N8O8a2A3Qeu+8cTrTfPymGSnmmK 6GRxNjjF6bJInP4Wb7TJkWaZK1WHltJIuG/4Kf31zaKEvneHBgbTb3FG3tvkoF24 nLcGnnPs850= =BlUR -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: PGP signing (was: no subject)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Mike, 10-Nov-2002, 10:04 -0700 (17:04 UK time) Mike [M] in mid:1932793500.20021110100409;telusplanet.net said: M OK I read all the stuff about PGP installed it etc. Which version have you installed? M Figured out how to manually attach signatures etc. If you're using a supported version with a plug-in (6.5.8ckt or GnuPG for instance) then you don't have to manually attach a signature. Just configure TB to use the correct version in Tools | OpenPGP | Choose OpenPGP version. Otherwise, you should use the tooltray utility that comes with whichever version of PGP you are usin. M Now I'm trying to automate. I tried exporting my key, and M importing it into my vcard, but it says it's of the wrong file M type. It is. vCards hold S/MIME keys, not PGP keys. M When I try and send a message it says I don't have an openPGP M private key, but I do - In PGP.. ... but have you designated it as default in your PGP options? Does the key contain the same email address as that you are using in your From field? These are important factors. M I can still cut and paste my key into the message, but I suspect M there's an easier way. Thanks in advance. Your key is not needed there. You only need to do that when sending someone your key. You don't need to do that to PGP sign a message. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v1.62/Beta7 on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 ' -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1rc1-nr1 (Windows 2000) iD8DBQE9zpMxOeQkq5KdzaARAidmAKCIQdtWNRY1D02War2KlmzFRocOmQCdF9xq z8lhTl9Fc5jTVxd+/caG54w= =Q5e0 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: PGP Signing, and drafts
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Jonathan, @26 July 2002, 17:15 -0500 (23:15 UK time) Jonathan Angliss [JA] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to TBUDL: JA ... Now repeat the process, but before sending, stick it in the JA draft folder, reopen, and send, and it doesn't sign it... any idea JA why? Yes. The SignComplete and UsePGP flag settings reset to the account default values when reopening a draft message. This happens in reverse when the account is set for signing by default and an unsigned message is saved as draft and subsequently reopened. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v1.62/Beta1 on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 ' -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.1.90-nr1 (Windows 2000) iD8DBQE9QemVOeQkq5KdzaARAiEQAKCoLJPV1MH0tusr8/s5yiryp4YAUACfWwmR CIjgiPL/EpAAKjkxxBmjWfI= =z7kq -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: PGP Signing, and drafts
On Fri, 2002-07-26 at 19:30, Marck D Pearlstone wrote: JA ... Now repeat the process, but before sending, stick it in the JA draft folder, reopen, and send, and it doesn't sign it... any idea JA why? Yes. The SignComplete and UsePGP flag settings reset to the account default values when reopening a draft message. This happens in reverse when the account is set for signing by default and an unsigned message is saved as draft and subsequently reopened. Wouldn't you class that as a bug though? Or is that one of those undocumented features? Personally I find it rather annoying, there is a reason I set it in certain templates to sign, and in others, to leave it unsigned... having to remember to resign it after storing it as a draft is a pain, especially when you get several hundred emails a day, without counting the work load as well ;) -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: PGP Signing, and drafts
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Jonathan, @27 July 2002, 20:14 -0500 (02:14 UK time) Jonathan Angliss in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to The Bat User List: Yes. The SignComplete and UsePGP flag settings reset to the account default values when reopening a draft message. This happens in reverse when the account is set for signing by default and an unsigned message is saved as draft and subsequently reopened. Wouldn't you class that as a bug though? Not really. It's more what it is than a bug (see below). Or is that one of those undocumented features? Again, not really. It's one of the shortcomings of the V1 design. Personally I find it rather annoying, So do I. If you are interested in why - the message data doesn't include anywhere to save the flag settings. Hopefully v2 will address this design hole. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v1.62/Beta1 on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 ' -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.1.90-nr1 (Windows 2000) iD8DBQE9QfWmOeQkq5KdzaARAhqaAKDsSwDrpWs+FvnI/b7/ne9OyNmrKQCgyRnG 2s5oIYvXy2n30dUZFxW3hrM= =jJXh -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re[2]: PGP signing - odd characters
Hello Clif, Friday, February 01, 2002, 2:48:49 AM, you wrote: I think I've been Edited. grin Awww don't worry about the women... as the HGTG says... along with the rest of earth they're Mostly Harmless. And Carren's odd characters just confirm that... well... she's an odd character :) hehehehe (boy am I in trouble!) Jim -- Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Vers: 1.53d FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Re: PGP signing - odd characters
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Jim, On 01 February 2002 at 04:03:52 -0500 (which was 09:03 where I live) Jim wrote in msgid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] hehehehe (boy am I in trouble!) moderator My left hand is reaching for the trout as the thread veers into the OT gully. Let's close this one folks (or take it to TBOT ... busy list and all that). /moderator - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- List moderator ___ \ BrainStorm - thinking^10^10 - www: http://www.brainstormsw.com / \ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com / · TB! v1.54 Beta/34-14F4B4B2 on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 · -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (MingW32) iD8DBQE8WmISOeQkq5KdzaARAskaAJ0TN1Y/XVQDlD57M5QilL2KxHglGQCeLbRU NlnRRhkYZtOxAr52heMqPWg= =7F3N -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Vers: 1.53d FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Re: PGP signing - odd characters
Carren, Thanks for letting me know I wasn't alone in having this problem. I didn't reply for a couple of days to see if anyone had anything further to add, but apparently not. The ironic thing is that breaking their PGP plug-in and having to use the PGP clipboard tools was the very reason I dropped Eudora and switched to TB! in the first place. sigh Regards, Clif Monday, January 28, 2002, 12:03:44 PM, Carren Stuart wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday, 29 January 2002 at 8:27 a.m. Clif wrote: CO Greetings, all. CO I am using the 6.5.x PGP plug-in with TB! 1.53. Not always, but CO frequently when I select Privacy/OpenPGP/Sign entire text it adds CO a bunch of odd characters after the last line of my text and CO before the PGP signature. CO Is this a known bug? Or have I misconfigured something? Cliff, Welcome to the *weird characters* club! :-) I posted a while back about this and so far noone seems to really know what causes it, or why it does not always happen! It isn't anything that *we* have misconfigured as far as I can tell. Maybe it *is* a bug. I have gone back to using PGP tray to sign etc and only use the plugin every now and again just for fun! :-) Maybe someday someone will be able to truly enlighten us! Carren PGP public key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=PGP_Key_Body=Please%20send%20key 3 3 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8ckt (Build/06) Comment: As long as one keeps searching, the answers come iQA/AwUBPFUF0cqIEIT739NzEQLzeQCgnKwb/9YXwS2czhoASXT5+cB4V1kAoMe1 vgpVjrXpONLR3jPQ/BE+A2kH =LLOX -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Vers: 1.53d FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Re[2]: PGP signing - odd characters
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday, 1 February 2002 at 4:28 p.m. Clif wrote: CO Thanks for letting me know I wasn't alone in having this problem. CO I didn't reply for a couple of days to see if anyone had anything CO further to add, but apparently not. CO The ironic thing is that breaking their PGP plug-in and having to CO use the PGP clipboard tools was the very reason I dropped Eudora CO and switched to TB! in the first place. sigh Oh! But surely now that you have TB! you realise just what a great email client it is? :-) You wouldn't be without it now right? Besides, the PGP tray and hotkeys really are just as quick to use as the plugin in my humble opinion! I still would like to know why it creates the weird characters though! Curiosity has the better of me :-) Carren PGP public key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=PGP_Key_Body=Please%20send%20key -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt (Build 06) Comment: As long as one keeps searching, the answers come iQA/AwUBPFltvMqIEIT739NzEQJ4lQCfaPbkQThV0QlGKtKCpuicsRJ/DxEAn3vB RxpDDtaTtEFL7XegiwXbu/48 =xHNF -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Vers: 1.53d FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Re: PGP signing - odd characters
Hey, hey! Did I imply I would defile myself to return to the use of the spyware laden bloatware with its soiled diaper colored icons? Nay, never! I just find it ironic that the thing that irritated me about The Other Client and caused me to switch to TB! is now an irritation (nothing more). I wouldn't give up the templates, the outbound filtering, etc. etc. Or the TBUDL list! grin The editor however running for cover! Clif Thursday, January 31, 2002, 8:16:00 PM, Carren Stuart wrote: Oh! But surely now that you have TB! you realise just what a great email client it is? :-) You wouldn't be without it now right? Besides, the PGP tray and hotkeys really are just as quick to use as the plugin in my humble opinion! I still would like to know why it creates the weird characters though! Curiosity has the better of me :-) Carren -- Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Vers: 1.53d FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Re: PGP signing - odd characters
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Carren, On 01 February 2002 at 17:16:00 +1300 (which was 04:16 where I live) Carren Stuart wrote in msgid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Besides, the PGP tray and hotkeys really are just as quick to use as the plugin in my humble opinion! Yes, and besides, they may be unsightly but they do no harm. I still would like to know why it creates the weird characters though! Curiosity has the better of me :-) I've had a good try to seem the rhyme/reason in it and failed. Theories abound about patched plug-ins (it's not that) and encoding method (8bit vs 7bit vs MIME vs QP). I still don't see the common denominator. And nary a problem with GnuPG. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- List moderator ___ \ Thought made easy..Brainstorm www: http://www.brainstormsw.com / \ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com / · TB! v1.54 Beta/34-14F4B4B2 on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 · -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (MingW32) iD8DBQE8WhqQOeQkq5KdzaARAjn2AJ9iu0VbFTgfk4l1+x9ftyq0Q2oJuwCfZcgb zyewz9gTUdzo0SKFBJZIvjE= =YLP5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Vers: 1.53d FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Re[2]: PGP signing - odd characters
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday, 1 February 2002 at 5:30 p.m. Clif wrote: CO The editor however runnilng for cover! Wow! You're in big trouble now! I'm with Melissa (of course!) TB!'s editor is perfect! :-) But I too will refrain from giving you the *editor* lecture! ;-) Carren PGP public key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=PGP_Key_Body=Please%20send%20key -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt (Build 06) Comment: As long as one keeps searching, the answers come iQA/AwUBPFmMpMqIEIT739NzEQKkNACg2sihbdHNJ9T8qwO18wZSEjt60ecAnjIZ DVL5qz2k2DWOudwEE3zTFMjw =fh1e -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Vers: 1.53d FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Re: PGP signing - odd characters
I played around a bit, but also couldn't find a common denominator. Sometimes adding a single linefeed after makes it go away; sometimes, before the first line; sometimes both; or not. Like you and Carren point out, it's more of an intellectual curiosity to me at this point. In my case, I just found the whole thing humorously ironic, and that it wasn't just me. Now when all of my code is completely bug free. yeah, right. Regards, Clif Thursday, January 31, 2002, 8:33:18 PM, Marck D Pearlstone wrote: I've had a good try to seem the rhyme/reason in it and failed. Theories abound about patched plug-ins (it's not that) and encoding method (8bit vs 7bit vs MIME vs QP). I still don't see the common denominator. And nary a problem with GnuPG. -- Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Vers: 1.53d FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Re: PGP signing - odd characters
I think I've been Edited. grin Thursday, January 31, 2002, 10:27:53 PM, Carren Stuart wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday, 1 February 2002 at 5:30 p.m. Clif wrote: CO The editor however runnilng for cover! Wow! You're in big trouble now! I'm with Melissa (of course!) TB!'s editor is perfect! :-) But I too will refrain from giving you the *editor* lecture! ;-) Carren PGP public key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=PGP_Key_Body=Please%20send%20key -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt (Build 06) Comment: As long as one keeps searching, the answers come iQA/AwUBPFmMpMqIEIT739NzEQKkNACg2sihbdHNJ9T8qwO18wZSEjt60ecAnjIZ DVL5qz2k2DWOudwEE3zTFMjw =fh1e -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Vers: 1.53d FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
PGP signing - odd characters
Greetings, all. I am using the 6.5.x PGP plug-in with TB! 1.53. Not always, but frequently when I select Privacy/OpenPGP/Sign entire text it adds a bunch of odd characters after the last line of my text and before the PGP signature. Is this a known bug? Or have I misconfigured something? Thanks. Clif -- Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Vers: 1.53d FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Re: PGP signing - odd characters
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday, 29 January 2002 at 8:27 a.m. Clif wrote: CO Greetings, all. CO I am using the 6.5.x PGP plug-in with TB! 1.53. Not always, but CO frequently when I select Privacy/OpenPGP/Sign entire text it adds CO a bunch of odd characters after the last line of my text and CO before the PGP signature. CO Is this a known bug? Or have I misconfigured something? Cliff, Welcome to the *weird characters* club! :-) I posted a while back about this and so far noone seems to really know what causes it, or why it does not always happen! It isn't anything that *we* have misconfigured as far as I can tell. Maybe it *is* a bug. I have gone back to using PGP tray to sign etc and only use the plugin every now and again just for fun! :-) Maybe someday someone will be able to truly enlighten us! Carren PGP public key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=PGP_Key_Body=Please%20send%20key 3 3 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8ckt (Build/06) Comment: As long as one keeps searching, the answers come iQA/AwUBPFUF0cqIEIT739NzEQLzeQCgnKwb/9YXwS2czhoASXT5+cB4V1kAoMe1 vgpVjrXpONLR3jPQ/BE+A2kH =LLOX -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Vers: 1.53d FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
Re: PGP signing problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ciao Nick, Tuesday, September 19, 2000, 5:35:33 AM, you wrote: In any case , after i have installed the 1.47b2 version, S/MIME still give me the above message NA Stefano, are you wanting to use PGP, or S/MIME? The two are both NA encryption systems, yet very different. I believe you are confusing the NA two, and the way things are set up, it's understandable. Yes, infact, also because of my 'ignorance' about S/MIME and certificate ecc... The only yhing that i know well about is PGP :-) NA The "Sign when completed" that you mention, refers to S/MIME, and you need NA to import a Certificate from Verisign or Thawte for this. If you go to NA Privacy/PGP, you will see the PGP related commands for signing, NA encrypting, and signing/encrypting. Yes, i have do it, with verisign, (60 day certificate) and it work well now ! (But i prefere PGP) NA Do you have PGP installed on your computer? What version? If you want help NA with that, why don't you join our PGP-Basics Group: Yes, i have 6.5.3 version registered (with PGPDisk). NA http://www.egroups.com/group/PGP-Basics Today egroups doesn't work, it's down :-( NA We have a lot of TBUDL/TBBETA Members on the List as well. If you don't I'll subcribe to it soon ! NA -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- NA Version: PGP Desktop Security 6.5.8 ^ Is this a registered version ? What i have to do to make TB show my version ? (it only show 6.5) Thanks ! - -- eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] WEB : http://www.zamprogno.com - http://www.zamprogno.it ICQ : 3813299 Using The Bat! 1.47 Beta/2 Under Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5i iQA/AwUBOccKsVx+XOtF/kMsEQL8WQCeO/pNh4aEelGBobzWerS5WRlUiTMAnjgI Y+wICaBzkJZZI3mHsZeitp89 =XUhx -END PGP SIGNATURE- S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: PGP signing problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ciao Stefano, Tuesday, September 19, 2000, 9:41:52 AM, you wrote: Oops, sorry for S/MIME attachment ! - -- eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] WEB : http://www.zamprogno.com - http://www.zamprogno.it ICQ : 3813299 Using The Bat! 1.47 Beta/2 Under Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5i iQA/AwUBOccTNFx+XOtF/kMsEQLqbQCgigbDkWvqYsM4FDszcUeKigmV9ugAn3d6 OsXzbr8zX4n+VZ/i7ezNJFge =PQMh -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On September 19, 2000, at 12:41:52 AM, Stefano Zamprogno Wrote: Is this a registered version ? What i have to do to make TB show my version ? (it only show 6.5) Thanks ! I used a Hex Editor on the DLL... If you also have 6.5.8 installed on your Computer, let me know and I will send you a copy of my DLL, but be warned that it will also indicate "Desktop Security Suite". If you want to download Desktop Security Suite 6.5.8 for free, go here: ftp://ftp.zedz.net/pub/crypto/pgp/pgp60/pgp658/ Nick N.J. Andriash [ TB! v1.47 Beta 4 | PGP 6.5.8 | Win 98 v4.10 ] Vancouver, B.C. Canada | PGP Key ID: 0x7BA3FDCE _ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP Desktop Security 6.5.8 Comment: Join PGP-Basics at http://www.egroups.com/group/PGP-Basics iQA/AwUBOceNyMUChHR7o/3OEQIKaQCgmjnLi0p71tRAPHn09ECJ8M7xpC0AoPrc GFdstzOsfjR0HDpkv9OEAYWI =Slot -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing problem
This message: 19/09/2000 22:00 GMT. Hello Nick, A reminder of what Nick ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) typed on: 19 September 2000 at 09:01:14 GMT -0700 NA If you want to NA download Desktop Security Suite 6.5.8 for free, go here: What's the difference between all the different version there? I see two the same but one was just over 1Mb the other 10Mb. -- _ Best regards, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tony. Using The Bat! 1.47 Beta/4 S/N A27A5E65 Windows 98 ME 4.90 Build 3000 Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=PGPkeyrequest -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On September 19, 2000, at 2:00:58 PM, Tony Boom Wrote: What's the difference between all the different version there? I see two the same but one was just over 1Mb the other 10Mb. The 1 MB file you see there is obviously an incomplete archive. The largest file there is the retail version of Desktop Security 6.5.8, followed by the retail version of PGP Personal Privacy, and finally the Freeware versions. Nick N.J. Andriash [ TB! v1.47 Beta 4 | PGP 6.5.8 | Win 98 v4.10. ] Vancouver, B.C. Canada | PGP Key ID: 0x7BA3FDCE __ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP Desktop Security 6.5.8 Comment: Join PGP-Basics at http://www.egroups.com/group/PGP-Basics iQA/AwUBOchFN8UChHR7o/3OEQJ8GACbBGNU1xxPOzYlW5Db1jlVq9DL+J0AoIw9 Mr0xaAKsHZtWaOZKZlB2Zdn7 =IYhe -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
PGP signing problem
Hello Bat lovers, I tried to sign one message (by checking sign when completed) but it says: 1. No signing certificate for [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2. No valid signing certificates. Cannot sign the message using S/MIME When I uncheck S/MIME option everything goes ok. I think I didn't see this option (just upgraded to TB 1.46) What is s/mime and why is that option checked by default? Note: when I sign entire text (from menu) there are no problems at all (even if S/MIME is enabled), problem exists just when I try to sign with: sign when completed. P.S. Check my new signature! -- Best regards, Vladimir mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | / - - \ ( @ @ ) .:-==-::--==oOOo-(_)-oOOo==--::-==--:. .. .. .. Vladimir Mincev .. .. *Pinky* .. .. .. .. E-mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .. .. Phone me at: +381 64 1321602 .. ':-==-::--==--::--==--::-==--::-==--:' (__) (__) -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ciao Vladimir, Monday, September 18, 2000, 11:49:59 AM, you wrote: The same here ! VM I tried to sign one message (by checking sign when completed) but it says: VM 1. No signing certificate for [EMAIL PROTECTED] VM 2. No valid signing certificates. Cannot sign the message using S/MIME - -- Bye,Bye... TIME di Stefano Zamprogno Via A.Bonetto,6 31044 Montebelluna Treviso E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] WEB: http://www.zamprogno.com - http://www.zamprogno.it ICQ : 3813299 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5i iQA/AwUBOcX6ZFx+XOtF/kMsEQL5IgCg3oo40lF3HNNBczTtaYZGV6jJj8gAoKCC GCO54rHuNndZgoP+OXFbdfC/ =4i6g -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org [ attachment has been remove by MDaemon ]
Re: PGP signing problem
Hello all, Monday, September 18, 2000, Vladimir Mincev wrote: I tried to sign one message (by checking sign when completed) but it says: 1. No signing certificate for [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2. No valid signing certificates. Cannot sign the message using S/MIME When I uncheck S/MIME option everything goes ok. I think I didn't see this option (just upgraded to TB 1.46) What is s/mime and why is that option checked by default? Note: when I sign entire text (from menu) there are no problems at all (even if S/MIME is enabled), problem exists just when I try to sign with: sign when completed. no problem here. Try Beta/2 - Max repaired some S/MIME problems. Don't forget to tell then, if is this problem still actual. -- Bye Marek Mikus Using the best The Bat! 1.47 Beta/2 under the worst Windows 98 4.10 Build 1998 Intel Celeron 266 MHz, 32 MB RAM -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org [ attachment has been remove by MDaemon ]
Re: PGP signing problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ciao Marek, Monday, September 18, 2000, 2:31:43 PM, you wrote: I tried to sign one message (by checking sign when completed) but it says: 1. No signing certificate for [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2. No valid signing certificates. Cannot sign the message using S/MIME MM no problem here. Try Beta/2 - Max repaired some S/MIME problems. Don't MM forget to tell then, if is this problem still actual. Sorry for stupid question, but, must i download also the TBMapi.zip file ? In any case , after i have installed the 1.47b2 version, S/MIME still give me the above message - -- Bye,Bye... TIME di Stefano Zamprogno Via A.Bonetto,6 31044 Montebelluna Treviso E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] WEB: http://www.zamprogno.com - http://www.zamprogno.it ICQ : 3813299 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5i iQA/AwUBOcYF+lx+XOtF/kMsEQKb/gCgny2ZgJtxbkSptD/3X1AtfuCSzJ0An1hk 7rINZXBT3mzL8ibO5dIix4Vs =Tyi7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org [ attachment has been remove by MDaemon ]
PGP signing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hi, We can setup a macro for "sign when completed". But can we say in the template with WHICH key we want sign, assuming there are many signing keys in the keyring ? Thanks, Cameleon http://cameleon.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 8.0b iQEVAwUBObdqKbpXBpKU5vjjAQGKdAf/ZnjakkFksaKaOqhnmUIcPs+2D8uD6IlC RPSuBe4xjU7U91ngvHWBIgS0eWn9+sMFPLhxlQVNKSTqxPv79RbZ1Kf51gZ+ekkb UNQqaah3w0aD+UNJEZ71s38iPW/LXtNowOW7zItRUyCL8o0ZQZnqSsUiopzAuNK9 7HLTFFB1zQXEzsumpwQMWS82RQpkQoo3wllcBt1ihtj1ap7FSpATJO9BfSWVUsHO OoKFoXhHDPcTu1xBokCvEYq9GYmgrxEV5cTDJSLn80awM5b4uiw/mCMp7iJ5nrx3 nh4UWqsdowkmvUGTvrWhv22BeiSpby8vUuAcM6OUyj7JXMQtFCnoDw== =8+d8 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing
Hello all, Thursday, September 07, 2000, Cameleon wrote: We can setup a macro for "sign when completed". But can we say in the template with WHICH key we want sign, assuming there are many signing keys in the keyring ? no. You can write wish :-) -- Bye Marek Mikus Using the best The Bat! 1.46 Beta/5 under the worst Windows 95 4.0 Build B Intel Celeron 266 MHz, 32 MB RAM -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Thursday, September 07, 2000, 8:16:18 AM, Marek wrote: Hello all, Thursday, September 07, 2000, Cameleon wrote: We can setup a macro for "sign when completed". But can we say in the template with WHICH key we want sign, assuming there are many signing keys in the keyring ? no. You can write wish :-) Wish. BTW, key needs to be identified by KeyID. ;) - -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. - ---+- -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5i iQA/AwUBObfYpXpf7K2LbpnFEQJ5dQCeMJZC8WcuZ3dOz4wk1WBEF0kxXhwAoPcV yio2UyOjsZqZ8lbBFUfmDP4E =LNL8 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[2]: PGP signing question.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 */Reply Sunday, May 28, 2000, 2:05:08 AM, you wrote: NA -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- NA Hash: SHA1 NA On Saturday, May 27, 2000, 4:52:37 PM, Christian Dysthe wrote: CD U.why is that? Isn't PGP..eh..PGP? I mean isn't a 1024 key just as CD secure implemented in The Bat! as used from an external application? I am CD not expert, maybe I have missed something? NA Well, for one thing, I don't believe the internal implementation allows NA for use of anything other than RSA Keys. The question then remains: Which NA algorithms are stronger... RSA or DH/DSS? In practise, RSA Keys seem to be NA more vulnerable, and the reasons can be found here: RSA old style keys are much more vulnerable. I've got a v.usefull screensaver that brute force crack 512 bit RSA keys overnight :-) External PGP is free and simple and can be used to digitally sign everything. Or encrypt strange files g. From Jamie [EMAIL PROTECTED] 22:00:16 30 May 2000 //Insert comment here Windows 98 4.10 Build 1998 The Bat 1.44 - -- Jamiemailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.0.2i Comment: Jamie Dainton - [EMAIL PROTECTED] iQA/AwUBOTQsPvwQejftkdBIEQI5yQCeNtZEmy4OjDM/vKFIjR20934XNcMAn38L uPRrcIJy5bsaHdk3I0r+yS8k =aDK3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing question.
Hello phil, On Sun, 28 May 2000 11:28:16 -0700 GMT your local time, which was Monday, May 29, 2000, 1:28:16 AM (GMT+0700) my local time, phil wrote: Greetings Nick! I look at it this way If they say they aren't--they ARE. If they say it isn't--it IS. If they say they don't--they DO. If they say it's the truth--it's a LIE. How many more examples do you need. LOL Nick, you know my opinion on this subject but it isnt something one should discusss to noisily on public places as you havent got any idea which servers scan and which donot And certain keywords stick a bit out... Best regards, tracer -- Using theBAT 1.44 with Windows 98 mail to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am using FireTalk: 321338 ICQ: on request Website: www.phuketcomputers.com Our special website hosting/mailservers are now operational -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing question.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday, May 27, 2000, 8:38:53 PM, Gary wrote: p Technically if you want to get down and say that, then I've always p heard that the older the version of pgp (ie. 2.x) are harder to p crack than the newer windows versions. I can't remember where I p heard that though, I've always believed it. There are arguments for and against Open Source Software as being more secure than Closed Source Software. The relevant arguments can be read here: http://www.securityfocus.com/commentary/19 http://www.technocrat.net/955986079/index_html Personally, I believe Open Source Software has the "potential" to be more secure, but there is also value in security through obscurity. :o) G This is because the older versions have the open source code readily G available for inspection to see if there has been any tampering via G checksums, both the US and International versions. The new versions - G well, the source code has not been available, as far as I can tell. I know source code is available for 6.5.1, and perhaps even 6.5.2, but beyond that I'm not sure. Again, I don't see the value in using something along the lines of 5.X vintage when Open Source exists for 6.5.1, and that is only _if_ OSS is important to you... because the latest freeware version is 6.5.3 Nick -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.3 Comment: Digitally signed to allow for authentication by recipient. iQA/AwUBOTC3S8UChHR7o/3OEQLjFACg/ENANUloXDFwTBdCiJMDyax72YkAnRJX thSowOggDeDd5RfyzoI6mE9Z =dh4C -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing question.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Servus Nick, Am 28.05.2000 so gegen 08:06 meintest Du: Personally, I believe Open Source Software has the "potential" to be more secure, but there is also value in security through obscurity. :o) But you remember the discussion on PGP-Users about my governments claims against PGP in favour of OpenPGP and a possible NAI/NSA "friendship"? While with Open Source, you can dismish such claims, you cannot by the obscure way ;) Nevertheless, I gotta throw in that source code is also, "of course" avail for newer Windows builds, both the CK-T and the International version, allthough for the newest builds it ain't there yet. A good source for such links is www.pgpi.org (Stale Schumachers site)... Nick Cheers, Johannes mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - -- Fehler sind erzielte Ergebnisse, die nicht den erwarteten Ergebnissen entsprechen. Fehler sind die Quelle der Kreativität! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5i iQEVAwUBOTDJqwt4MvNz1i1BAQGf3Af/XZdHCMPkrD5pSACiLBRZr5PBkSckgHLH Crb/evw8LlkWBlDVdgl62I/lnsCAFPWveq1+y91oMTXAXed2yBLWx7KK6DawgVVD 8tT8vA/eVh2gNlnW3sMLKhAKmGld4Mn9UYRfHaGpJ3FNipaJFJ5Z3sIouNliT7Mb ilUhmuzDkoHKVeHdsSzfn2RlTMFJNY9TfXD/nufmn53/wasLLfBMy4XBIUuPiigk 7wnhW1xfBOMwHek/ye+zYNhxxtc/b8z7ZwEwhma1OXeFs8tVHcgk89QKwERqUeAJ ieAN/rHxxJvicXFn2Apar4FcKiLTYE9pWG4B5S9pu4XlXFk1dgjkow== =1u+h -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[2]: PGP signing question.
Greetings Nick! On Saturday, May 27, 2000 at 23:06:07 GMT -0700 (which was 11:06 PM where you think I live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: p Technically if you want to get down and say that, then I've always p heard that the older the version of pgp (ie. 2.x) are harder to p crack than the newer windows versions. I can't remember where I p heard that though, I've always believed it. NA There are arguments for and against Open Source Software as being more NA secure than Closed Source Software. The relevant arguments can be read NA here: NA http://www.securityfocus.com/commentary/19 NA http://www.technocrat.net/955986079/index_html NA Personally, I believe Open Source Software has the "potential" to be more NA secure, but there is also value in security through obscurity. :o) Although I've spent plenty of time on securityfocus.com I disagree, security through obscurity is not very effective. Look at all the shareware programs that get cracked because of that belief. (Old Fravia used to talk about that) OPINION I wouldn't trust NAI at this point. But that is me personally. I don't use anything by them at all. I miss the old MCafee SCAN.EXE days!! now they are over the edge./OPINION I read back in 1995-96 an article was in Extraordinary Science Magazine published by the ITS and the article was written by JW McGinnis (the magazine is OOP now) to download version 2.3 of pgp because this whole whoopla was about to hit and the governments were going to start messing with pgp. I've also head numerous articles by hackers that said that the "older versions are the best." When asked which version do I want, the answer was, the oldest version you can get. The version that McGinnis was telling us to get was the source code of 2.XX (the version without the windows support dll's) So when I try to run that in The Bat it won't work. There are shells for it although I am not crying about this, I'm only passing on information that I understand. I trust McGinnis more than I trust someone I haven't met--I've met McGinnis in San Francisco, Ca. And talked with him, and he is one who has reasons specifically to encrypt secrets, I haven't met some of the other well known people in the cryptography field; some of which I assume are US planted disinformation websites. There are MILLIONS if not BILLIONS of crypto sites on the web. Cryptome in/out is another example of a place that i hang out reading news. Then there is the Mitnick saga.. Is the FBI not still trying to crack into his hard drives at this very moment? What version did he use? Obviously the password will be making a big difference in how soon the FBI will be cracking it. Although I am using a ckt (Cyber Knights Templar) version of pgp (which allow a larger key) at the moment, I also have and use a much older version and retain all the extra junk in my startup files for that version. I use this ckt version mainly to stymie the Free Dial Up account[s] possibility of reading mail. I'm not after keeping fbi spooks out of my top secret physics experiments on cold fusion with the ckt build. If I wanted that I would use the older pgp. note: that if you get the ckt build, expect for a large key to take more than an hour to compile--I fell asleep waiting Somebody mentioned RSA vs. DH/DSS I trust the DH/DSS more than RSA because I've heard that RSA has been cracked, or tampered with. Problem is getting other people to use DH/DSS most people don't create more than one key, or end up deleting keys like I do. "Whoops. Damn you mean to tell me that the key will stay on the MIT server if I lost my key?" -AHahahah LOL G This is because the older versions have the open source code readily G available for inspection to see if there has been any tampering via G checksums, both the US and International versions. The new versions - G well, the source code has not been available, as far as I can tell. NA I know source code is available for 6.5.1, and perhaps even 6.5.2, but NA beyond that I'm not sure. Again, I don't see the value in using something NA along the lines of 5.X vintage when Open Source exists for 6.5.1, and that NA is only _if_ OSS is important to you... because the latest freeware NA version is 6.5.3 Na , you just haven't searched. the sources are available. But most people (myself included) wouldn't know what the hell we were looking at. It's still Great fun to compile though! -- ... autoexec.bat: A Wise Yuppie with a new copy of the bat. --- The Bat! 1.44 + 98Lite + Revenge of Mozilla II -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing question.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday, May 28, 2000, 1:24:27 AM, Johannes M. Posel wrote: JMP But you remember the discussion on PGP-Users about my governments JMP claims against PGP in favour of OpenPGP and a possible NAI/NSA JMP "friendship"? While with Open Source, you can dismish such claims, JMP you U... I don't think you can "dismiss such claims" based solely on the Open Source Code. Remember, one point of the argument _for_ obscurity, is that with Open Source, not only can the good guys find problems, but so can the bad guys, only they won't be so forthright in letting others know of it. Nick -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.3 Comment: Digitally signed to allow for authentication by recipient. iQA/AwUBOTFS+cUChHR7o/3OEQIHBwCeNGZouJAXSU79wLs1Q/R73SrYthYAoNQ8 maUe1KWau0yO3Lx32B/a0ZGT =tc1c -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[2]: PGP signing question.
Greetings Nick! On Sunday, May 28, 2000 at 10:10:20 GMT -0700 (which was 10:10 AM where you think I live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: NA U... I don't think you can "dismiss such claims" based solely on the NA Open Source Code. Remember, one point of the argument _for_ obscurity, is NA that with Open Source, not only can the good guys find problems, but so NA can the bad guys, only they won't be so forthright in letting others know NA of it. I'm not an expert, I'm not a reverse-engineer, but I know... If you obscure it, then someone will just reverse-engineer it until they know what's in it. Or know enough about what's in it that it is no longer obscured. Again, this is exactly how shareware programs get cracked. It's stupid to think that obscurity alone by itself will be a silver bullet. You might make it take longer to figure out. It's delaying the unavoidable. And big sis makes a stupid greedy mistake with this. But you can believe what you want to believe. You can write your spaghetti coded, obscured, closed source all you want, there will still be those who can figure out just enough to crack through what ever you do. Go ahead, use obscurity, but don't rely on it completely 100% or your in for a big suprise. I am one individual that won't be listening to big sis's propaganda about obscurity. OTOH- if you make source available, then people report and fix bugs, and it only gets better. -- ... If only women came with pulldown menus and online help like The Bat! does.. --- The Bat! 1.44 + 98Lite + Revenge of Mozilla II -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[2]: PGP signing question.
Greetings Nick! On Sunday, May 28, 2000 at 10:18:02 GMT -0700 (which was 10:18 AM where you think I live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: p Although I've spent plenty of time on securityfocus.com I disagree, p security through obscurity is not very effective. Look at all the p shareware programs that get cracked because of that belief. NA But Phil, that really isn't a fair comparison. The complexities of the NA examples you cite, differ greatly, and it's the very nature of the NA complexity of PGP Code that brings the value of Open Source into question. what do you want me to agree? I don't agree. sorry. heh NA I must admit though, that I'm fence-sitting on this issue, and not taking NA a stand as I earlier alluded to. I don't have enough information, or NA experience, to harbour a viewpoint, one way or the other. I look at it this way If they say they aren't--they ARE. If they say it isn't--it IS. If they say they don't--they DO. If they say it's the truth--it's a LIE. How many more examples do you need. LOL If they say there is no money involved--there IS. Follow the money, find the corruption. simple. NA Don't you wonder though... why the US Government suddenly lifted the NA export ban on PGP? Kind of makes you question whether or not the NSA knows NA something about their ability re. PGP, that we don't. Why should I wonder about that? Why would I assume the NSA monitors anything at all? -- ... Mark McGwire knows how to use The Bat! --- The Bat! 1.44 + 98Lite + Revenge of Mozilla II -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing question.
Hello Tom Plunket, On Sun, 28 May 2000 00:33:44 -0700 GMT your local time, which was Sunday, May 28, 2000, 2:33:44 PM (GMT+0700) my local time, Tom Plunket wrote: NA Personally, I believe Open Source Software has the "potential" to be more NA secure, but there is also value in security through obscurity. :o) Although there may be corporate value in obscurity, I have a hard time accepting that at a personal level. Sure, nobody is supposed to know what the whitehouse.gov and fbi.gov servers are running so that nobody will know easy attacks against them. However, at the same time, if *I* am unable to examine an implementation of a cryptography routine (or anything, for that matter), I may well be suffering from corporate key-farming (from the previously mentioned link, just a direct line to what I'm talking about): http://www.scramdisk.clara.net/pgpfaq.html#SubDSSSubliminal Anyone remember the big brouhaha when it was discovered that Microsoft was collecting computer information during the famous "Windows Update" feature? While I won't say that such a thing would never happen in OSS, it's unlikely to be a "surprise" when someone sees that it's happening. What about that backdoor one of the USA politicians recent blabbed about, and the NSA spare key... I wouldnt trust any encrypto from MS or similar USA companies unless the source was available to look at.. After the turnaround the USA government did on excrypting they HAVE to be able to decode it. If any version of Linux becomes settled in enough to be THE one to use, you can be sure there will be attempts to sneak similar code in. May already be it in the kernel... You have NO idea what data they nick at various times, can even be your pgp keys as its dead easy to see if someone has pgp and where the keys are. Who tells you your secret key hasnt been nicked? Take pgp on its own, code should be code, not starting with some silly banner telling the whole world what it is and also as a side effect showing when a decode was succesful. You want to multiple loop pgp, and you can, that banner tells exactly when a loop was succesful... And why should headoffice CIA and AOL be so nice and close together that I would want to bet there is a big fibreoptic cable between the 2Or that likely all mail and chat via AOL, ICQ, Hotmail and a few others gets scanned for certain keywords / users.. -tom! Best regards, tracer -- Using theBAT 1.44 with Windows 98 mail to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am using FireTalk: 321338 ICQ: on request Website: www.phuketcomputers.com Our special website hosting/mailservers are now operational -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing question.
Hello Tom Plunket, On Sun, 28 May 2000 00:33:44 -0700 GMT your local time, which was Sunday, May 28, 2000, 2:33:44 PM (GMT+0700) my local time, Tom Plunket wrote: http://www.scramdisk.clara.net/pgpfaq.html#SubDSSSubliminal So who checked the MS double key system (g)?? Interesting reading... Best regards, tracer -- Using theBAT 1.44 with Windows 98 mail to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am using FireTalk: 321338 ICQ: on request Website: www.phuketcomputers.com Our special website hosting/mailservers are now operational -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[2]: PGP signing question.
Hello Nick, Saturday, May 27, 2000, 12:15:17 AM, you wrote: NA I have two Accounts Christian, and would like to do the same thing, but NA I've not figured out how, unless someone else has come up with a way. It NA would be a nice implementation though. NA Instead, TB! simply PGP clear-signs via whatever key you've designated as NA your default key in PGP Keys. Even if you were to use the %SIGNCOMPLETE NA macro, you would still have to choose which key you wanted to use... via NA the drop down list under "Singing Key" in the accompanying dialogue box... NA each and every time you send a message. Don't forget to disengage the NA passphrase caching in PGP Options if you always want that choice. NA Nick NA -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- NA Version: PGP 6.5.3 NA Comment: Digitally signed to allow for authentication by recipient. NA iQA/AwUBOS9Z4sUChHR7o/3OEQI2SwCg59KDGH2OruRYyDYqemok0vxzg5MAoJCO NA XrP7oZCC9yawgwF1mdhZh+cm NA =DcOG NA -END PGP SIGNATURE- I was pretty sure this was implemented when I started playing with PGP in The Bat! since The Bat! is a (and one among *very* few) truly multi account supporting clients. I see you use an "external" PGP implementation. It wouldn't be that the internal PGP implementation in The Bat! can do this? I am now pretty sure it can't after having looked in every corner for both documented and a possibly undocumented feature, but I ask again :) You are right though, in these multi mail account times when even your average ISP gives you a few aliases this functionality would be very helpful. -- Best regards, Christian Dysthe http://christian.dysthe.tripod.com ICQ: 3945810 PGP Public Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Send_PGP_Key -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing question.
On Saturday, May 27, 2000 at 5:13 PM or thereabouts, Christian Dysthe wrote the following about PGP signing question.: Christian You are right though, in these multi mail account times Christian when even your average ISP gives you a few aliases this Christian functionality would be very helpful. I'm sure there are reasons of which I'm simply unaware, but why cannot one simply have their multiple addresses on *one* key? Why the need for multiple keys? TIA Chuck -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Chuck Mattsen[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.users.uswest.net/~mattsen =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Random Thought/Quote for this Message: Some people fall for everything and stand for nothing. -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[2]: PGP signing question.
Hello Nick, Saturday, May 27, 2000, 5:25:22 PM, you wrote: NA Hopefully, PGP will be better implemented in Version 2.0, but until then, NA it's my feeling that the external PGP implementation, as opposed to the NA internal, would better accommodate the security concerns of TB! Users. U.why is that? Isn't PGP..eh..PGP? I mean isn't a 1024 key just as secure implemented in The Bat! as used from an external application? I am not expert, maybe I have missed something? Besides that, the built in PGP is so easy to use and set up I think a lot more users will be able to use it than the external alternatives. Which is...yes! would accommodate security for more The Bat!users. Some security is better than none, right? :) NA Nick NA -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- NA Version: PGP 6.5.3 NA Comment: Digitally signed to allow for authentication by recipient. NA iQA/AwUBOTBLUMUChHR7o/3OEQKMkgCgsJFXgZOPqwS8aWjRy3mMvW7oJ+EAnR3H NA qq+riMzhTLKmwp0HDpZYR5eK NA =yYaO NA -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Best regards, Christian Dysthe http://christian.dysthe.tripod.com ICQ: 3945810 PGP Public Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=Send_PGP_Key -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing question.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday, May 27, 2000, 4:52:37 PM, Christian Dysthe wrote: CD U.why is that? Isn't PGP..eh..PGP? I mean isn't a 1024 key just as CD secure implemented in The Bat! as used from an external application? I am CD not expert, maybe I have missed something? Well, for one thing, I don't believe the internal implementation allows for use of anything other than RSA Keys. The question then remains: Which algorithms are stronger... RSA or DH/DSS? In practise, RSA Keys seem to be more vulnerable, and the reasons can be found here: http://www.scramdisk.clara.net/pgpfaq.html The latest freeware version of PGP is 6.5.3, and PGP Desktop Security 7.0 has already been released, although the freeware version has not. There is no reason to be using anything other than the latest and greatest, when it comes to security. Nick -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.3 Comment: Digitally signed to allow for authentication by recipient. iQA/AwUBOTBwwsUChHR7o/3OEQJZ6ACfVwKFQTKBnoDRqL0X0IvarIW/R9gAn3V3 RzM+3p/HdLfEiceFBM9nVJ3e =wSR2 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: PGP signing question.
On Saturday, May 27, 2000, 3:24:42 PM, Chuck Mattsen wrote: I'm sure there are reasons of which I'm simply unaware, but why cannot one simply have their multiple addresses on *one* key? Why the need for multiple keys? Although PGP allows for more than one User name or E-Mail address for use with the same Key Pair (Private and Public Key), it allows for only one of them to be a primary identifier. Most Users have specific security concerns that are not addressed by having just the one Key Pair, and so you see a lot of Key Pairs with only one address associated with it. It has more to do with signing, encrypting and verification concerns than anything else. Nick -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[2]: PGP signing question.
Greetings Nick! On Saturday, May 27, 2000 at 18:05:08 GMT -0700 (which was 6:05 PM where you think I live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: NA The latest freeware version of PGP is 6.5.3, and PGP Desktop Security 7.0 NA has already been released, although the freeware version has not. There is NA no reason to be using anything other than the latest and greatest, when it NA comes to security. Technically if you want to get down and say that, then I've always heard that the older the version of pgp (ie. 2.x) are harder to crack than the newer windows versions. I can't remember where I heard that though, I've always believed it. -- ... Unicorns vs. Bat , and that unicorn is just about out of BLOOD NOW! hahahah --- The Bat! 1.44 + 98Lite + Revenge of Mozilla II -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[3]: PGP signing question.
Hi Phil, On Saturday, May 27, 2000, 10:20:43 PM, you wrote in part about "PGP signing question.": p Technically if you want to get down and say that, then I've always p heard that the older the version of pgp (ie. 2.x) are harder to p crack than the newer windows versions. I can't remember where I p heard that though, I've always believed it. This is because the older versions have the open source code readily available for inspection to see if there has been any tampering via checksums, both the US and International versions. The new versions - well, the source code has not been available, as far as I can tell. There is no new International version, but just a copy from the US version (6.53) -- Best regards, Gary Today's thought: Life is a waste of time, time is a waste of life, so get wasted all of the time and have the time of your life. PGP Public Key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=SendPGPKey -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
PGP signing question.
Hello TBUDL, I have different PGP keys for different mail accounts. Is it way to have The Bat! sign with a specified key based on which account mail is sent from? -- Best regards, Christian Dysthe http://christian.dysthe.tripod.com ICQ: 3945810 PGP Public Key: Send me an e-mail with "pubkey" as subject. -- -- View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com To send a message to the list moderation team double click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
