The https-ed webpgp interface should authenticate me via some sort of
passphrase and then I can submit ciphertext for decryption
Note: beware of keyloggers and cameras. Webcafes are far from secure
environment. Consider using one-time passwords, eg. something like S/Key.
Then you still run the
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Lucky Green wrote:
The question is - do I have to code this or has someone
already done it ?
http://www.lokmail.com/
It is inadvisable that anyone use Lokmail. The implications of a
trust-us encrypted mail service are obvious, and the people behind
Lokmail are of
Anonymous wrote:
I want to use PGP while checking/sending e-mail via web interface on
someone else's machine (say, internet cafe). So in one window I have
webmail interface, and in the other window I have webpgp interface,
and I paste ciphertext back and forth.
The https-ed webpgp interface
The United States expects Iraq to treat captured U.S. and allied troops
humanely, President Bush said Sunday. If there is somebody captured -- and
it looks like there may be -- I expect those people to be treated
humanely, he said.
No problem: I'm sure they'll get better treatment than the POWs
On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, Tyler Durden wrote:
1. What makes these lies as you claim commie? Do you think that by
impugning US policy in the region we are by implication stating that the
forced exit of the Soviets was bad? Quite saying commie all the time. All
the commies are dead, except
On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, Steve Schear wrote:
What part of the infrastructure is being made scarce? You and I aren't
part of the infrastructure. The selection of a value for our time is just
another market force at work.
Unless MTAs can reject mail for lack of postage, this approach will not
On Saturday, March 22, 2003, at 06:48 PM, stuart wrote:
On Saturday, March 22, 2003, barabbus came up with this...
b On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 18:05:05 -0800 stuart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Of course they'll find what they're looking for. Even if it's not
there.
Does anyone seriously believe that if
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Once the war is over senior people in the U.S. administration better
have proof acceptable to the international community in open forums if
they do not wish to share a similar fate as their Iraqi counterparts.
I think the US believe that, with the USSR gone, they are
--
On 23 Mar 2003 at 8:09, Jamie Lawrence wrote:
Hey, what do you guys want? Not only are we not very useful,
but, hell, I don't think we've been *communist* since at
least the first attempt around at asian nations. Oh, wait.
Commie means not like me.
Commie is an explanation for the fact
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Morlock Elloi wrote:
Ever tried to install a ssh client on a random internet cafe computer ?
What's wrong with PuTTY on a floppy, USB stick, or
http://leitl.org/putty.exe ? Works every time.
why not just use ssh? you can scp the text to your host, encrypt/decrypt it
*there* then scp it back if needs be. you also then don't need to use
webmail - just have a mailbox on that server that you forward your webmail
to, and that you send email in the name of the webmail account from.
its
Morlock Elloi wrote:
Ever tried to install a ssh client on a random internet cafe computer
Yup.
1. download putty
2. run putty
3. run batchfile that changes password to next oneshot
4. do whatever is needed
5. exit putty
:)
Hey, this war is looking better all the time. We got our first fragging
already, and the US troops are finding themselves no real match for the
Iraqis. I just heard that there's at least 1 million well armed Ba'ath party
irregulars, plus unknown numbers of armed Iraqi tribes, besides the
--
On 23 Mar 2003 at 17:39, Mike Rosing wrote:
What they *can't* do is destroy small armies. So the
Persians, Talibs and other muslim groups that have a grudge
against the US will bleed them to death one soldier at a
time.
The US is not bleeding in Afghanistan. Iraq, like the
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Steve Schear wrote:
Unless MTAs can reject mail for lack of postage, this approach will not
fix a large majority of the problems of spam. Unless clearing is built
into the protocol, sender pays is a non-starter.
I agree that there are lots of good reasons for
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Thomas Shaddack wrote:
On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, J.A. Terranson wrote:
To date, my personal pet has been payment in computationally intensive
solutions to questions posed by the recipient. This forced expenditure of
effort, even if minor, removes the spammer's incentive
On Sun, Mar 23, 2003 at 05:39:05PM -0800, Mike Rosing wrote:
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Hey, this war is looking better all the time. We got our first fragging
already, and the US troops are finding themselves no real match for the
Iraqis. I just heard that there's at
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Sat, Mar 22, 2003 at 03:21:46PM -0600, J.A. Terranson wrote:
To date, my personal pet has been payment in computationally intensive
solutions to questions posed by the recipient. This forced expenditure of
effort, even if minor, removes the
--
Mike Rosing:
The US technology is orders of magnitude better, they can
easily destroy large armies.
Harmon Seaver:
Not inside the cities they can't, not without tons of
collateral damage, which will crucify Dubbya and Blair.
No one (except the US military which hopes to rule an
On Sunday, March 23, 2003, at 11:38 AM, J.A. Terranson wrote:
The United States expects Iraq to treat captured U.S. and allied
troops
humanely, President Bush said Sunday. If there is somebody captured
-- and
it looks like there may be -- I expect those people to be treated
humanely, he said.
At 04:24 AM 3/23/2003 +0100, Thomas Shaddack wrote:
On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, J.A. Terranson wrote:
To date, my personal pet has been payment in computationally intensive
solutions to questions posed by the recipient. This forced expenditure of
effort, even if minor, removes the spammer's
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Hey, this war is looking better all the time. We got our first fragging
already, and the US troops are finding themselves no real match for the
Iraqis. I just heard that there's at least 1 million well armed Ba'ath party
irregulars, plus unknown
On Sunday, March 23, 2003, at 07:13 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Sun, Mar 23, 2003 at 05:39:05PM -0800, Mike Rosing wrote:
Don't get your hopes up. With air power and seige tanks the Iraqi's
don't
have much ammo or food. Just like the US controls Afghanistan, they
will claim they control Iraq.
Quoting Morlock Elloi [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
why not just use ssh? you can scp the text to your host, encrypt/decrypt it
*there* then scp it back if needs be. you also then don't need to use
webmail - just have a mailbox on that server that you forward your webmail
to, and that you send email
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, James A. Donald wrote:
Commie is an explanation for the fact that hostile lies about
US allies who fought communists are usually accompanied by
favorable lies about the Soviet Union and its servants.
--digsig
James A. Donald
That's an interesting
--
Ken Brown:
But there certainly was some assistance from the US to
the Taliban. US They didn't buy those 500 Stingers in
Kmart
James A. Donald:
Commie lies.
At the beginning of the recent Afghan war the US estimated
the Taliban had at most fifty stingers. During the war it
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Hey, this war is looking better all the time. We got our first fragging
already, and the US troops are finding themselves no real match for the
Iraqis. I just heard that there's at least 1 million well armed Ba'ath
party
irregulars, plus unknown
27 matches
Mail list logo
