On Monday, April 29, 2002, 2:29 PM, you wrote:
glad I remembered this message. I upgraded to 160h and then all of a
sudden I started to get blank messages too. Wait, it was after I
switched PGP versions from 6.5.8 freeware to 6.5.8 ckt build07. At
least on win XP 6.5.8ckt 07 works with TB !!
tha
On Monday, April 29, 2002, 11:14 PM, you wrote:
well, I think I either answered my own question, or I did the import
right, because it now shows a nice checked box, right ?
thanks,
JN> Paul,
JN> Also be sure you have imported your certificate into TB! Under
JN> Account/Properties/General, cli
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: MD5
On Monday, April 29, 2002, 9:56 PM, you wrote:
ACM> Yes. The S/MIME keys are different from the PGP keys. You have to go
ACM> to a central authority and have them generate key pair/s for you. You
ACM> can follow the tutorial found here http://www.mi
Hello Robert,
Tuesday, April 30, 2002, 12:00:29 AM, you wrote:
Beeger> It is a stable system and the only extensions I use the whole time is
Beeger> Norton Internet Security 2002 Professional and Norton Antivirus 2002.
Beeger> This constellation works fine with 1.60c.
Beeger> So I don't think it
Hello, Lynna!
Monday, April 29, 2002, 10:13:36 PM, you wrote:
LL> version works fine on some machines and is buggy on others
LL> there seems to be a conflict with other software or
LL> operating systems that might be the cause of it
That's the fate of software. When it runs, you are happy.
Richard Evans
Tuesday, April 30, 2002, 8:12:56 AM, you wrote:
> I too had problems with h everytime I closed TB! it crashed and gave me an error
>message. Now back on C and all happy again
Yes I also got the same errors when exiting the Bat 1.60h including an
Invalid page fault and a runtime e
Paul,
Also be sure you have imported your certificate into TB! Under
Account/Properties/General, click on the "edit personal certificates"
tab and, if necessary, import your Thawte certificate.
JN
Allie C Martin wrote on Monday, April 29, 2002:
> Paul Cartwright [PC] wrote:
> ...
PC>> I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Cartwright [PC] wrote:
...
PC> I have that option enabled ( checked) already (The enable SMIME),
PC> but I didn't have the sign when complete checked. It says I don't
PC> have an open pgp private key, but I have PGP6.5.8 installed and a
PC> priva
Bugs that I reported and that they could recreate were entered into
the system that way and then I was given a pointer to it via e-mail.
Monday, April 29, 2002, 8:06:08 PM, Marck wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> Hi Dwight,
> @30 April 2002, 18:48:41 -0500 (00:48
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday, April 29, 2002, 9:19 PM, you wrote:
I have that option enabled ( checked) already (The enable SMIME), but
I
didn't have the sign when complete checked. It says I don't have an
open pgp private key, but I have PGP6.5.8 installed and a priva
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gene Gough [GG] wrote:
...
GG> Bugs that I reported and that they could recreate were entered into
GG> the system that way and then I was given a pointer to it via e-mail.
Would you and all others concerned kindly restrict your quotations to
just e
I'm not having any trouble with vanishing messages, but periodically
over the past couple of days, TB (1.60h) seems unable to connect to
the server after a while. This is quickly remedied by disconnecting
and dialing up again.
Never had this problem before 'h', however, and wonder if anyone else
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Cartwright [PC] wrote:
...
PC> well, I am on windows XP, TB 160c and AVG. I'm not sure if I can
PC> read SMIME messages, but I have seen no messages in my inbox that
PC> I couldn't read. what would it look like if I couldn't read it ?
You should
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday, April 29, 2002, 4:13 PM, you wrote:
well, I am on windows XP, TB 160c and AVG. I'm not sure if I can read
SMIME messages, but I have seen no messages in my inbox that I
couldn't read. what would it look like if I couldn't read it ?
LL> He
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Cartwright [PC] wrote:
...
PC> I have thawte freemail certificates, but I'm not sure how to send
PC> them with email messages in TB. Outlook was easy, there was a menu
PC> item.
For TB!, it amounts to a menu item as well. In the editor, select
f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday, April 29, 2002, 5:06 PM, you wrote:
I have thawte freemail certificates, but I'm not sure how to send
them
with email messages in TB. Outlook was easy, there was a menu item.
LL> Hello Allie,
LL> Monday, April 29, 2002, 12:30:49 PM, you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Dwight,
@30 April 2002, 18:48:41 -0500 (00:48 UK time) Dwight A Corrin wrote
in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Hmm... I meant in the BugTraq system...
> If using the bug report from the help menu is no longer an official
> way to re
On Monday, April 29, 2002, 2:36:07 PM, Marck D Pearlstone wrote:
> Hmm... I meant in the BugTraq system...
If using the bug report from the help menu is no longer an official
way to report bugs, it shouldn't be there either. Should add that to
the "wake up" thread perhaps.
--
Dwight A. Corrin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Allie,
@29 April 2002, 15:30:49 -0500 (21:30 UK time) Allie C Martin wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
LL>> This message showed as having a VALID signature when I viewed it
LL>> ( has the green icon ), my setting is on Microsoft A
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Lynna,
@29 April 2002, 12:51:14 -0800 (21:51 UK time) Lynna Lunsford wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pearlstone>> That sometimes needs a bit of juggling to get the CA
Pearlstone>> certificate into the IE certificate repository.
Hello Allie,
Monday, April 29, 2002, 12:30:49 PM, you wrote:
Martin> My messages are PGP signed, not S/MIME signed. The problem we're
Martin> discussing is with S/MIME signed messages.
Monday, April 29, 2002, 12:51:14 PM, you wrote:
Lunsford> Actually what I am seeing is a THAWTE FREEMAIL SIGN
Hello Marck,
Monday, April 29, 2002, 10:50:27 AM, you wrote:
>> I can view S/MIME signed messages alright. However, none of the sigs
>> verify as valid. :-/
Pearlstone> That sometimes needs a bit of juggling to get the CA certificate into
Pearlstone> the IE certificate repository.
Actually w
Hello Allie,
Monday, April 29, 2002, 12:30:49 PM, you wrote:
Martin> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Martin> Hash: SHA1
Martin> Lynna Lunsford [LL] wrote:
Martin> ...
ACM> Hmmm. I'll give v1.60h a spin then and see how things work out
ACM> with that option enabled.
LL>> This message
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lynna Lunsford [LL] wrote:
...
ACM Hmmm. I'll give v1.60h a spin then and see how things work out
ACM with that option enabled.
LL> This message showed as having a VALID signature when I viewed it (
LL> has the green icon ), my setting is on
Hello Allie,
Monday, April 29, 2002, 10:33:07 AM, you wrote:
Martin> I can view S/MIME signed messages alright. However, none of the sigs
Martin> verify as valid. :-/
Funny, when I was using "c" version the signatures I saw
were showing "invalid". But when I installed the "h"
versions I could
Hello Marck,
Monday, April 29, 2002, 10:50:27 AM, you wrote:
Pearlstone> Hi Allie,
Pearlstone> @29 April 2002, 13:33:07 -0500 (19:33 UK time) Allie C Martin wrote in
Pearlstone> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ACM>>> Hmmm. I'll give v1.60h a spin then and see how things work out
ACM>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Miguel,
@29 April 2002, 21:42:07 +0200 (20:42 UK time) Miguel A. Urech wrote
in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> That sometimes needs a bit of juggling to get the CA certificate
>> into the IE certificate repository.
> Hey! Are you be
Hello Melissa,
Monday, April 29, 2002, 8:49:53 AM, you wrote:
Reese> When I moved from 1.60 to 1.60h, I noticed that I could not open any
Reese> message that was signed using S/MIME. When I installed 1.60c over
Reese> 1.60h, all was back to normal.
Reese> Melissa
Is it possible that there is s
Hello reclutamiento,
Monday, April 29, 2002, 8:44:06 AM, you wrote:
reclutamiento> I have 1.60h and I do not have any problem whatsoever with my 65.000
reclutamiento> emails in several folders and 5 accounts.
reclutamiento> To me, it seems people updgrading from betas into 1.60h is the source
r
Hello Marck,
> That sometimes needs a bit of juggling to get the CA certificate into
> the IE certificate repository.
Hey! Are you betraying PGP? ;-)
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain)
Using The Bat! v1.60c
Current
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Dwight,
@29 April 2002, 14:26:54 -0500 (20:26 UK time) Dwight A Corrin wrote
in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> That's assuming, of course, that somebody has reported it as a
>> bug...?
> mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] on TBBETA
Hmm... I mea
On Monday, April 29, 2002, 2:15:47 PM, Marck D Pearlstone wrote:
> That's assuming, of course, that somebody has reported it as a
> bug...?
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] on TBBETA
--
Dwight A. Corrin
P O Box 47828
Wichita KS 67201-7828
316.263.9706 fax 316.263.6385
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Dwight,
@29 April 2002, 13:55:54 -0500 (19:55 UK time) Dwight A Corrin wrote
in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ... or you can switch to MS CryptoAPI S/MIME and all is back to
>> normal.
> I would submit that you shouldn't be forced
Hi Allie,
@29 April 2002, 13:33:07 -0500 (19:33 UK time) Allie C Martin wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ACM>> Hmmm. I'll give v1.60h a spin then and see how things work out
ACM>> with that option enabled.
> I can view S/MIME signed messages alright. However, none of the sigs
>
On Monday, April 29, 2002, 1:29:00 PM, Allie C Martin wrote:
> Hmmm. I'll give v1.60h a spin then and see how things work out with
> that option enabled.
> For those who don't know, you switch to MS CryptoAPI S/MIME by going
> to the 'Options menu' and selecting 'S/MIME..'. The option will be in
On Monday, April 29, 2002, 1:05:29 PM, Marck D Pearlstone wrote:
>> When I installed 1.60c over 1.60h, all was back to normal.
> ... or you can switch to MS CryptoAPI S/MIME and all is back to
> normal.
I would submit that you shouldn't be forced to do that to read s/mime
messages, but that th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Allie C Martin [ACM] wrote:
...
>>> When I installed 1.60c over 1.60h, all was back to normal.
MDP>> ... or you can switch to MS CryptoAPI S/MIME and all is back to
MDP>> normal.
ACM> Hmmm. I'll give v1.60h a spin then and see how things work out wi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marck D Pearlstone [MDP] wrote:
...
>> When I installed 1.60c over 1.60h, all was back to normal.
MDP> ... or you can switch to MS CryptoAPI S/MIME and all is back to
MDP> normal.
Hmmm. I'll give v1.60h a spin then and see how things work out with
t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Melissa,
@29 April 2002, 09:49:53 -0700 (17:49 UK time) Melissa Reese wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> When I moved from 1.60 to 1.60h, I noticed that I could not open any
> message that was signed using S/MIME.
... when doing
I too had problems with h everytime I closed TB! it crashed and gave me an error
message. Now back on C and all happy again
-Original Message-
From: "Robert F. Beeger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 16:48:05 +0200
Subject: 1.60h is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday, April 29, 2002, at 9:36:14 AM PST, Robert F. Beeger wrote:
> I don't fool around with betas, either.
> I had 1.53. Upgraded to 1.60, 1.60c and at least 1.60h.
> So fooling around with betas is not the issue in my case.
Right. I went fro
Hello reclutamiento,
Monday, April 29, 2002, 6:44:06 PM, you wrote:
rsn> I have 1.60h and I do not have any problem whatsoever with my 65.000
rsn> emails in several folders and 5 accounts.
rsn> To me, it seems people updgrading from betas into 1.60h is the source
rsn> problem. I upgraded from 1
I have 1.60h and I do not have any problem whatsoever with my 65.000
emails in several folders and 5 accounts.
To me, it seems people updgrading from betas into 1.60h is the source
problem. I upgraded from 1.60c release version, and to this moment I
have not run into any problem. Nor I have ever
Hello!
I've read about 1.60h here. One wrote that it would be much faster. So
I downloaded 1.60h, unpacked the whole contents of the_bat.exe with
WinRAR 3b7 into my TheBat-Folder and started it.
I found no speed improvements but found that most of the bodies of the messages
in my Send-Mail folde
44 matches
Mail list logo
