On Sun, 5 May 2002, Lynna Lunsford wrote: > Hello Mandara, > > Sunday, May 5, 2002, 3:25:37 AM, you digitally penned the following: > > M> Again, don't turn PGP off, since there is no reason for it; this > M> system is readable for all. But if you are using MS CryptoAPI then you > M> should count on that that some of us cannot read those messages. > > It is too bad that the MS cryptoAPI is not supported equally through > all versions of TB and other mail clients because it leaves the > smallest "footprint" visually on the email when sent. What I mean to > say is that visually it is the most appealing, less intrusive than > several lines of garbled code,letters, numbers. If it were equally > supported, accepted I would opt of using SMIME of PGP in every day > email for that reason alone. I use PGP because I operate a web site > community and I use a form which encrypts to PGP to safeguard members > personal information as they send it to me. : )
If you are worried about PGP dumping all the jumbled letters on, why not allow users to send a specific request to your email to get the PGP signature? I've noticed one or two people on this list have done that. Unless of course you have to sign it. If this is the case, then you have the option of creating the email as plain text, and signing it with PGP... then attach the .sig file... a little cleaner ;)... I'll check on how that works out on Monday, see if everything works okay like that. > <snip> > M> As to upgrading: I, personally, cannot "upgrade" TB if it lack in some > M> options which were present in previous versions, and are highly vital > M> for me, just for the sake of some options which are highly buggy and > M> completely needless to me. It would be in fact a downgrade or > M> mussgrade. I, still, hope those 1.60x versions will as soon as > M> possible be just a messy past. > > I thank you for your e-mail, it was informative, and I will turn the > PGP back on, though I wish it made less of a "footprint" in the actual > e-mail's sent. Version "J" is working fine for me, but then, as you > mentioned I have not used any version before 1.60c and therefore have > no experience with TB prior to version "c" to compare it to. Are you using the PGP with TB! or are you using an external PGP program? If you're using the external program, see my idea above, give it a go... if you're using the one inside TB!... then I'm not sure what to do about the footprint at the bottom. -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ________________________________________________________ Current Ver: 1.60i 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://bt.ritlabs.com
