Re[2]: S/MIME vs PGP

On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:55:14 -0500 GMT, Scott McNay wrote: SM> As decribed by Allie, the internal implementation doesn't work for me SM> at all, and I need to use MS Crypto in order to reecognize my own I take it you are referring solely to S/MIME here? I've come to the conclusion that the inter

Re[2]: S/MIME vs PGP

On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 07:16:06 -0500 GMT, Allie Martin wrote: Thanks for the information! That really helped out a bunch, I now have GnuPG operating and the GPGshell. It'll take a some more reading and experimenting to learn how to use. Pixie -- Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 95 4.0

Re[2]: S/MIME vs PGP

On Monday, August 25, 2003, Allie Martin wrote in : AM> I personally use PGP and prefer it since I don't have the above AM> compatibility issue to worry about. Allie, It surprises me a bit that you are using PGP, because I see no type of PGP signature or hash indication

Re[2]: S/MIME problem

Hello Allie, you wrote AM> I assume you imported the Thawte certificate with your browser? Yes. My browser is Opera 7.10. AM> You need to export the key with your browser, making sure to export the AM> private key. When exporting with IE, there's actually an option there to AM> export the priva

Re[2]: S/MIME standards was: Re: Anti-Virus

Hello Mandara, Sunday, May 5, 2002, 1:30:56 PM, you digitally penned the following; M> Hash: SHA1 M> On Sat, 4 May 2002, at 08:53:00 -0500 Michael wrote: MD>> I can confirm this. I've tried reading a message originated from MD>> Outlook and TheBat! 1.60c. The implementations are mutually MD>>

Re[2]: S/MIME - CA Root certificates

Why TBOT - as this is a BAT specific problem I'd have thought this was ok. Or am I missing something Peter. Colin Current Ver: 1.60c FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbu

Re[2]: S/MIME - CA Root certificates

Hi, the certificate we are talking about here was generated by Bat 1.60 under Account, Preferences - Edit Personal Certificates. The signature verification looks ok at this end but then I suppose it would as I have generated the cert? Apart from that, I'm lost Colin PS - I've signed this one al

Re[2]: S/MIME (was: Re: Two things that puzzle me)

Hello Philippe You wrote On Sat, 2 Mar 2002, at 11:07:13 [GMT +0100] (21:07 Australian Eastern Time,Saturday): > For this last point you can right-click on it and choose sthng as > "import key and certificate" and it will be validated... well : I > believe it will be Did that, no

Re[2]: S/MIME

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 24 Sep 2000 01:23:12 +0200 "Oliver Sturm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: OS> What I really wonder about is... I hear people telling me PGP is so OS> difficult to use that "normal" users often don't do it because they OS> don't understand it. A

Re[2]: S/MIME

Hello All, On 24-9-2000 1:29:02, Oliver wrote: O> Anyway, if there's an advantage to S/MIME, it might be that I can O> trust someone's key if it's signed by a known authority. With PGP, O> there's a lot of hassle to get my own key signed by some folks who are O> widely-known, and ther

Re[2]: S/MIME

Hello Tony Boom, On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 00:08:57 +0100 GMT your local time, which was Tuesday, September 19, 2000, 00:08:57 (GMT+0100) (BST) my local time, Tony Boom wrote: TB> Ops, Sorry! Don't remember anything about that decision. TB> No need to reach for the fish. Consider my embarras

Re[2]: S/Mime

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Drunin, Thursday, August 03, 2000, 09:13:33, you wrote: D> But it doesn't seem to happen ;-( I remember Max whispering something about D> auto importing certificates, but I cannot manage it. D> Also confusing 'Import PGP keys' in context menu

Re[2]: s/mime and certificates

hallo Gerd! on Wednesday, August 02, 2000, 10:15:18 AM, you wrote: GE> Hi Patrick, GE> on Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:45:22 +0200 GMT GE> your local time, which was 01.08.2000, 16:45:22 (GMT+0200) my local time, GE> you wrote about "s/mime and certificates": PE>> i have my own certificate but i'm not a