Re: [lists] re: Signing vs. encrypting was: Cipher v public key

2006-06-04 Thread Todd Zullinger
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Graham wrote: > On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 11:33:14 -0400 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] >> the cost is *astronomical* >> >> have played around with it when it was released as a free command >> line pgp 8.5 beta > [snipped] > > AFAIK this is the latest PG

Re: [lists] re: Signing vs. encrypting was: Cipher v public key

2006-06-04 Thread Graham
On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 11:33:14 -0400 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > While I prefer gnupg to pgp myself, I did just happen to see a > > reference to pgp command line today > > the cost is *astronomical* > > have played around with it when it was released as a free > command line pgp 8.5 beta [snipp

Re: Signing vs. encrypting was: Cipher v public key

2006-06-02 Thread Janusz A. Urbanowicz
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 11:33:14AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Todd Zullinger tmz at pobox.com wrote on > Thu Jun 1 11:46:48 CEST 2006 : > > > While I prefer gnupg to pgp myself, I did just happen to see a > > reference to pgp command line today > > the cost is *astronomical* > > have play

re: Signing vs. encrypting was: Cipher v public key

2006-06-01 Thread vedaal
Todd Zullinger tmz at pobox.com wrote on Thu Jun 1 11:46:48 CEST 2006 : > While I prefer gnupg to pgp myself, I did just happen to see a > reference to pgp command line today the cost is *astronomical* have played around with it when it was released as a free command line pgp 8.5 beta has a few

Re: Signing vs. encrypting was: Cipher v public key.

2006-06-01 Thread Todd Zullinger
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Janusz A. Urbanowicz wrote: > gpg integrates better with autimation and I really doubt that there is > current, supported PGP for anything else than windows and mac. While I prefer gnupg to pgp myself, I did just happen to see a reference to pgp comma

Re: Signing vs. encrypting was: Cipher v public key.

2006-06-01 Thread Janusz A. Urbanowicz
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 01:59:37PM +0100, David Gray wrote: > Will suggest to the customer that we use signed & encrypted > transmissions. The only Issue we then have is that they wish to be > custodians of the private key, There is no need for them, from the cryptography point of view. Using p

RE: Signing vs. encrypting was: Cipher v public key.

2006-05-31 Thread David Gray
Hi, Thanks to all who have responded to these questions. Getting my head around it Now. Will suggest to the customer that we use signed & encrypted transmissions. The only Issue we then have is that they wish to be custodians of the private key, they are Looking into commerical methods fo