What happened to Imad Faiad? - PGP

This is a discussion on What happened to Imad Faiad? - PGP ; I noticed that all of Imad Faiad's pages (he maintained the ckt distribution of PGP) are defunct and see he hasn't posted here in a long time... what happened to him? Is the CKT distribution dead?...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 32

Thread: What happened to Imad Faiad?

  1. What happened to Imad Faiad?

    I noticed that all of Imad Faiad's pages (he maintained the ckt
    distribution of PGP) are defunct and see he hasn't posted here in a
    long time... what happened to him? Is the CKT distribution dead?

  2. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    On 26 Apr 2004 01:31:34 -0700, in article
    ,
    chrisl_ak@hotmail.com (Chris) wrote:

    >Is the CKT distribution dead?


    Sadly, for the time being, yes.

  3. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    In article , chrisl_ak@hotmail.com says...
    > I noticed that all of Imad Faiad's pages (he maintained the ckt
    > distribution of PGP) are defunct and see he hasn't posted here in a
    > long time... what happened to him? Is the CKT distribution dead?
    >

    His PGP658ckt is still available for d/l at
    ftp://zedz.net/pub/crypto/pgp/pgp60/pgp658_ckt/

  4. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, Casey wrote:

    > In article , chrisl_ak@hotmail.com says...
    > > I noticed that all of Imad Faiad's pages (he maintained the ckt
    > > distribution of PGP) are defunct and see he hasn't posted here in a
    > > long time... what happened to him? Is the CKT distribution dead?
    > >

    > His PGP658ckt is still available for d/l at
    > ftp://zedz.net/pub/crypto/pgp/pgp60/pgp658_ckt/


    This is good information. Thanks for posting it. However, the
    question arises, as it often does in these sorts of situations, How
    does one know that this version is legitimate and has not been hacked
    with a trojan or backdoor. Unfortunately for those of us who cannot
    read the source code for ourselves and compile it from scratch (and how
    do we know that the compiler has not been hacked?), sooner or later we
    almost have to take it on faith that some version is usable and safe.
    But how are we unsophisticated users supposed to know that it is
    reliable?

    --
    Paul Bartlett
    bartlett "at" smart "dot" net
    PGP key info in message headers

  5. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    Paul O. BARTLETT wrote:

    > On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, Casey wrote:
    >
    >> In article ,
    >> chrisl_ak@hotmail.com says...
    >> > I noticed that all of Imad Faiad's pages (he maintained the ckt
    >> > distribution of PGP) are defunct and see he hasn't posted here in a
    >> > long time... what happened to him? Is the CKT distribution dead?
    >> >

    >> His PGP658ckt is still available for d/l at
    >> ftp://zedz.net/pub/crypto/pgp/pgp60/pgp658_ckt/

    >
    > This is good information. Thanks for posting it. However, the
    > question arises, as it often does in these sorts of situations, How
    > does one know that this version is legitimate and has not been hacked
    > with a trojan or backdoor. Unfortunately for those of us who cannot
    > read the source code for ourselves and compile it from scratch (and how
    > do we know that the compiler has not been hacked?), sooner or later we
    > almost have to take it on faith that some version is usable and safe.
    > But how are we unsophisticated users supposed to know that it is
    > reliable?
    >

    You don't. The only way you can be sure is checking the source and compiling
    yourself, with a compiler you wrote yourself. But that's true for any
    crypto program. Does it not have the .asc files inside the zip, sigs of the
    setup exe with Imad's key? If you trust Imad you should be able to check
    the sig and run the program.

  6. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    In article , bartlett@smart.net says...
    > On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, Casey wrote:
    >
    > > In article , chrisl_ak@hotmail.com says...
    > > > I noticed that all of Imad Faiad's pages (he maintained the ckt
    > > > distribution of PGP) are defunct and see he hasn't posted here in a
    > > > long time... what happened to him? Is the CKT distribution dead?
    > > >

    > > His PGP658ckt is still available for d/l at
    > > ftp://zedz.net/pub/crypto/pgp/pgp60/pgp658_ckt/

    >
    > This is good information. Thanks for posting it. However, the
    > question arises, as it often does in these sorts of situations, How
    > does one know that this version is legitimate and has not been hacked
    > with a trojan or backdoor. Unfortunately for those of us who cannot
    > read the source code for ourselves and compile it from scratch (and how
    > do we know that the compiler has not been hacked?), sooner or later we
    > almost have to take it on faith that some version is usable and safe.
    > But how are we unsophisticated users supposed to know that it is
    > reliable?
    >
    >

    Also available at
    ftp://ftp.hacktic.nl/pub/crypto/pgp/pgp60/pgp658_ckt/

  7. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 15:39:09 -0400, in alt.security.pgp "Paul O. BARTLETT"
    wrote:

    > This is good information. Thanks for posting it. However, the
    >question arises, as it often does in these sorts of situations, How
    >does one know that this version is legitimate and has not been hacked
    >with a trojan or backdoor.


    Imad himself was very clear that his ckt versions should only be used if
    one is a competent programmer able to personally audit the code. It is NOT
    a version for Joe PGP User.



    shg

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP 8.1 (Build 307) Beta

    iQA/AwUBQI8xIZWn2pPDur23EQIG6QCeME+7Vsy44HkMCcyY4ZFI5+ OLwvUAniHO
    zLjhPjAaDb2eApG6nFoeg8j9
    =jS5N
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


    Simon H. Garlick
    PGP Keys available at www.garlick.net.nz/pgp.html

  8. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    In article ,
    not@this.address says...
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > On Mon, 26 Apr

    2004 15:39:09 -0400, in alt.security.pgp "Paul O. BARTLETT"
    >

    wrote:
    >
    > > This is good information.

    Thanks for posting it. However, the
    > >question arises, as it often

    does in these sorts of situations, How
    > >does one know that this

    version is legitimate and has not been hacked
    > >with a trojan or

    backdoor.
    >
    > Imad himself was very clear that his ckt versions

    should only be used if
    > one is a competent programmer able to

    personally audit the code. It is NOT
    > a version for Joe PGP User.
    >


    >
    >
    > shg

    shg, would you please give us the source of that
    information.
    I know Imad stated on his web page, not use CKT build 09 beta.
    Thanks, casey
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.10

    iD8DBQFAj+0QwqcQnbFekZARAorgAJ9CJXsZe5rnuxH4mPbwST LT9KO3tgCePPWh
    c0PjEEo1ulNndhZZT/mt6gY=
    =bLKa
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  9. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

    In Message-ID:
    posted on Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:44:29 GMT, Casey wrote:

    >I know Imad stated on his web page, not use CKT build 09 beta.


    Did he say NOT to use it, or just provide the caveat that there may be
    some yet undiscovered bugs and/or incompatibilities with other
    versions?

    I've been using it since it was released without any "as yet
    discovered" issues.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQEVAwUBQI/9cIqYm/ui68/XAQE7Cwf+JtS2uHCTTsv5txDIahk0kCCq1ErAXS4l
    MIO0CMF4V67jyPijCiq8cp6iuhxhA1y86tElC8xDaQbr9hlxyZ OgvfFvwkUUP/c5
    3jZcp7I0uFAsm2mUBPJTuUFQDz9F1831i0Bt5eMC7tjceh0jNx zhXnw9pPBXvbmG
    1GJ6uOO6Ihw+rJ3BHagezHbRYC3Hzw2Y/nrwDKeBfcPqCGNwyKDGv8GOSFzcVfo+
    37wnM3BiNQCj4rSWHVivLbf6OyJS6BQMmFd/siyrNf0Fv0jqzrdHky4kbgJsF6eL
    5n5p3N5ArDV2dkqF2sR+O26dcYsBaBoSanyfXGuZYBJCjHWoCh +huQ==
    =YjX8
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


    --

    Bart

  10. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    Casey wrote in
    news:MPG.1af9a94c73d19b4a98971a@news.west.earthlin k.net:

    > shg, would you please give us the source of that
    > information.
    > I know Imad stated on his web page, not use CKT build 09 beta.
    > Thanks, casey


    From: matic@cyberia.net.lb
    Subject: Re: Difference between 6.02 build 07 and 05 and PGP 6.5.2
    Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 13:06:16 GMT
    Newsgroups: alt.security.pgp

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

    Greetings,

    Build 05 is a major hack, Build 07 is an extreme case of PGP code
    hacking.

    My advise is as follows, do not use any of the ckt builds, or any hacked
    build for that matter, unless:-

    1) You can tell the diference between the various builds in
    the PGP builds zoo without a read me file.

    2) You can read and understand the source code and how it
    was modified.

    3) You know what you are doing.

    4) You are able and willing to bear the consequences should any problems
    arise.

    If your answer to any of the above is negative, do yourself a favour, do
    not use any of these hacked builds.


    Best regards

    Imad R. Faiad


    On Fri, 21 Jan 2000 10:12:54 +0200, in alt.security.pgp you wrote:

    >Hi,
    >
    >Could not find the readme.txt on Imad's page. Can anybody explain?
    >
    >Thanks for answers
    >


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: 6.5.1ckt http://irfaiad.virtualave.net/
    Comment: KeyID: 0x833F1BAD
    Comment: Fingerprint: 75CD 96A7 8ABB F87E 9390 5FD7 2A88 4F45

    iQEVAwUBOIjlgLzDFxiDPxutAQGB0wf9GQhw6pTVVBQkjHzXKh CgLjMl7qWfZ3Sh
    HCFyCxZtSwQ7TKDPV5boL7SZqBn5UqlP7Udsq2HDUWK9jgtltg aq369tmD30WzRj
    RxQrP8WyjDB3N4OhDMwMp0AHBGXl45tO/c9/rabtGvA5zjAmK/Uh5AQ4uunoV/6H
    gCWL03EW9MHKLjj08s/i3bM91kcQEJM1ew8lZZHNOUwi4KzPJGuUlyo3X91S6vH4
    YjYJIkjHl2qGWRrTf1V3YH4ltNkYd/aYPEuSmNi+ZGDjVCZ1oCubu1ZXDD+QEwbP
    tzyQ0Nwb0kJLg15zgrH4OOTeOgsJcO/R6pydKpZCS0pWMof9rORcVQ==
    =Wq4N
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  11. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Tom McCune wrote in
    news:bIWjc.38417$X14.30928@twister.nyroc.rr.com:

    > From: matic@cyberia.net.lb
    > Subject: Re: Difference between 6.02 build 07 and 05 and PGP 6.5.2
    > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 13:06:16 GMT
    > Newsgroups: alt.security.pgp


    It didn't verify here, but you can do a Google groups search for
    "Difference between 6.02 build 07 and 05 and PGP 6.5.2"
    if you want to verify his sig.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP 8.0.3
    Comment: My PGP Page & FAQ: http://www.McCune.cc/PGP.htm

    iQEVAwUBQJA5q2DeI9apM77TAQJGeggAgztNuWxSgxW9u2Wvbf yzfIS30QbJsAi0
    3+dWOyXg5YH5Za3Zm1iCXigAyFkYojD5ggPJkM1n/dj7GwUhwmIvRF/VYNSCyYXI
    SdTkGShGZjXOK8cdTJhlzP9SzJBCf+cwDdSVBE1ZKvt42vC1Th m/iufIzxLxzUmK
    B3O9hOX6MY/iun5VYdCgLmy/40uWuK1OC2XdydwAumG1ZlQDrTLALsBKe+2UK13l
    uaeP68XWEy2iYvV9/DI2ZUNf6bCN+Wc+zDzyQalCQ1R4Ky/B34Ml2uA3+J5zqSHW
    34sRzvRu6tFLP7p4LYEzxPd3sDEQS6GzOl1RG0vvBA/+jPVpPnan8g==
    =dh7c
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  12. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    Casey wrote in message

    > I know Imad stated on his web page, not use CKT build 09 beta.


    at the time that Imad made the beta 9's,
    the issue was the new secret key protection format introduced by
    gnupg,
    and then adopted in later versions of pgp8.x

    the 'problem' was,
    that once a new key is generated in ckt build 9,
    it is incompatible with any pgp less than 8.x,
    and also with ckt, build 8 or earlier

    as the new format is pretty much widely used now in pgp 8.x
    and gnupg,

    then ckt build 9 beta, is just as safe (and *great*) as any of the
    previous ckt builds,
    and if you are happy using build 8, then you should have no misgivings
    about build 9

    (minor point,
    just to illustrate Imad's amazing vision and foresight ;-)

    ckt 6.5.8, builds 8 and 9beta
    are capable of generating signing as well as encrypting 'subkeys'
    similar to gnupg,
    and the ckt builds, are the *only* pgp versions that can verify a
    signature from a gnupg signing subkey.

    this still cannot be done in 8.03
    although it 'has' been pointed out to the pgp 8 people,
    and will hopefully be fixed at sometime in the future)

    there are many other aspects of the ckt builds that are much more
    convenient,
    and these too have been pointed out, and requested as features,
    in the pgp.com forum

    fwiw,
    imho as a pgp user who has tried and played around with every pgp
    version
    since 2.x,

    i still find the ckt builds the easiest and most versatile to use,
    and except for the possibility of using a 256 bit cipher for a pgp
    disk,
    i find no advantages in pgp 8,
    but still find many inconveniences ...


    one of the best ways to make PGP 8+ the most optimal, user-friendly,
    compatible,
    and secure, pgp implementation,
    would be to *hire* Imad,
    and allow him to 'improve' the existing code.

    {would sign, but it turns out 'bad' when posting from google ;-(( }

    vedaal

  13. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    vedaal@hush.com (vedaal@hush.com) wrote in
    news:52a1833e.0404290645.5375bbb4@posting.google.c om:

    > Casey wrote in message
    >
    >> I know Imad stated on his web page, not use CKT build 09 beta.

    >
    > at the time that Imad made the beta 9's,
    > the issue was the new secret key protection format introduced by
    > gnupg,
    > and then adopted in later versions of pgp8.x
    >
    > the 'problem' was,
    > that once a new key is generated in ckt build 9,
    > it is incompatible with any pgp less than 8.x,
    > and also with ckt, build 8 or earlier
    >
    > as the new format is pretty much widely used now in pgp 8.x
    > and gnupg,
    >
    > then ckt build 9 beta, is just as safe (and *great*) as any of the
    > previous ckt builds,
    > and if you are happy using build 8, then you should have no
    > misgivings about build 9
    >
    > (minor point,
    > just to illustrate Imad's amazing vision and foresight ;-)
    >
    > ckt 6.5.8, builds 8 and 9beta
    > are capable of generating signing as well as encrypting 'subkeys'
    > similar to gnupg,
    > and the ckt builds, are the *only* pgp versions that can verify a
    > signature from a gnupg signing subkey.
    >
    > this still cannot be done in 8.03
    > although it 'has' been pointed out to the pgp 8 people,
    > and will hopefully be fixed at sometime in the future)
    >
    > there are many other aspects of the ckt builds that are much more
    > convenient,
    > and these too have been pointed out, and requested as features,
    > in the pgp.com forum
    >
    > fwiw,
    > imho as a pgp user who has tried and played around with every pgp
    > version
    > since 2.x,
    >
    > i still find the ckt builds the easiest and most versatile to use,
    > and except for the possibility of using a 256 bit cipher for a pgp
    > disk,
    > i find no advantages in pgp 8,
    > but still find many inconveniences ...
    >
    >
    > one of the best ways to make PGP 8+ the most optimal,
    > user-friendly, compatible,
    > and secure, pgp implementation,
    > would be to *hire* Imad,
    > and allow him to 'improve' the existing code.
    >
    > {would sign, but it turns out 'bad' when posting from google ;-(( }
    >
    > vedaal


    Your assessment is very similar to mine. I began asking myself what I
    was actually gaining by upgrading. To date, I've seen nothing offered
    that has tempted me to change from my favorite CKT build of PGP. It
    does everything and it does it well.

    One of the things oft overlooked is, with the CKT version of PGP you
    also get the PGP command line executable. This can be handy for
    certain applications. Also, the ability to spoof various versions of
    PGP comes in very handy. Just my .02

    - --
    Raphael
    There is no TRUTH. There is no REALITY. There is no CONSISTENCY.
    There are no ABSOLUTE STATEMENTS. I'm very probably wrong.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: 6.5.8ckt

    iQA/AwUBQJSEOO4FcZt1HA2ZEQI4PACg5SepeVuJOgLwLhB3FbsXcU tK9FoAnRW3
    CXHE/qztZd8r7izTNXJnApOW
    =S113
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  14. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    In article <52a1833e.0404290645.5375bbb4@posting.google.com>, vedaal@hush.com says...
    > Casey wrote in message
    >
    > > I know Imad stated on his web page, not use CKT build 09 beta.

    >
    > at the time that Imad made the beta 9's,
    > the issue was the new secret key protection format introduced by
    > gnupg,
    > and then adopted in later versions of pgp8.x
    >
    > the 'problem' was,
    > that once a new key is generated in ckt build 9,
    > it is incompatible with any pgp less than 8.x,
    > and also with ckt, build 8 or earlier
    >
    > as the new format is pretty much widely used now in pgp 8.x
    > and gnupg,
    >
    > then ckt build 9 beta, is just as safe (and *great*) as any of the
    > previous ckt builds,
    > and if you are happy using build 8, then you should have no misgivings
    > about build 9
    >
    > (minor point,
    > just to illustrate Imad's amazing vision and foresight ;-)
    >
    > ckt 6.5.8, builds 8 and 9beta
    > are capable of generating signing as well as encrypting 'subkeys'
    > similar to gnupg,
    > and the ckt builds, are the *only* pgp versions that can verify a
    > signature from a gnupg signing subkey.
    >
    > this still cannot be done in 8.03
    > although it 'has' been pointed out to the pgp 8 people,
    > and will hopefully be fixed at sometime in the future)
    >
    > there are many other aspects of the ckt builds that are much more
    > convenient,
    > and these too have been pointed out, and requested as features,
    > in the pgp.com forum
    >
    > fwiw,
    > imho as a pgp user who has tried and played around with every pgp
    > version
    > since 2.x,
    >
    > i still find the ckt builds the easiest and most versatile to use,
    > and except for the possibility of using a 256 bit cipher for a pgp
    > disk,
    > i find no advantages in pgp 8,
    > but still find many inconveniences ...
    >
    >
    > one of the best ways to make PGP 8+ the most optimal, user-friendly,
    > compatible,
    > and secure, pgp implementation,
    > would be to *hire* Imad,
    > and allow him to 'improve' the existing code.
    >
    > {would sign, but it turns out 'bad' when posting from google ;-(( }
    >
    > vedaal
    >

    Is there any good reasons to upgrade from ckt 08 to 09?
    Thanks, casey

  15. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    On Mon, 3 May 2004, Casey wrote:

    > > [cut]


    > Is there any good reasons to upgrade from ckt 08 to 09?
    > Thanks, casey


    Is there any good reason why you quoted an entire
    long post just to ask a one-line question when you didn't
    even need to quote the original post at all?

    --
    Paul Bartlett
    bartlett "at" smart "dot" net
    PGP key info in message headers

  16. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: RIPEMD160

    Casey wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <52a1833e.0404290645.5375bbb4@posting.google.com>,
    > vedaal@hush.com says...


    > Is there any good reasons to upgrade from ckt 08 to 09?


    it depends on your usage and preferences ;-)

    if you also use gnupg
    (btw, which i 'highly' recommend)
    then it is more convenient to use ckt build 9 beta,
    when importing keys made in gnupg, to pgp

    (it can still be done easily enough in ckt 8 too,
    but may involve a little confusion and extra work for someone new to gnupg)


    if you also use pgp 8.x
    (i.e. you have several different machines/laptops etc.)
    then you should also upgrade,
    for the same reason

    if you use pgp 7.x for your other systems,
    then you should *not* upgrade


    hth,
    vedaal

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/
    Comment: { Acts of Kindness better the World, and protect the Soul }
    Comment: { may not verify // posted from google ;-((( }
    Comment: KeyID: 0x6A05A0B785306D25
    Comment: Fingerprint: 96A6 5F71 1C43 8423 D9AE 02FD A711 97BA

    iQEVAwUBQJeqcmoFoLeFMG0lAQMoAAf/YPlgW3DE8qmu6TEqG8S2QKsV0yMyKBjM
    JwwfOKwoUdX3rCiw4Rrj0yM20yyhejJ9tiHSe01Ylz+cUySklo T9N/za9EVUtOgP
    rurvAGibM8ugU7HrJ6g26WtaE4thfcpaKsR25ja0TzL7n+ogoQ ula5RbSdo9Bibj
    8OD4FpdWHQYx1y/mqnAbi0E+O6k6D8dmpgnIBVI5iMyZD+ASOf4Bnh8L7EYYPV3C
    Zw9152FGKT9UBhdTgIaJqOb7prd16znOR0ESCNtJ6Uw/KtjluVF90jRwPsiS5V2V
    408U/pVBoLVWY75jL907q/oh8hx4wSSTZR68cogNA0OFNLKzIdtDLg==
    =1T9d
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  17. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?


    >

    Thank you Vedaal. Maybe this post will make Paul happy.

  18. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    In Message-ID:<52a1833e.0405040642.97ed7df@posting.google.com> posted on
    4 May 2004 07:42:24 -0700, vedaal@hush.com wrote:

    >Comment: { may not verify // posted from google ;-((( }


    ***[14C6D183] PGP Signature Status: good
    ***[14C6D183] Hash: RIPEMD160

    ***[14C6D183] Signer Key ID: 0x85306D25
    ***[14C6D183] Signer Key Fingerprint: 96A6 5F71 1C43 8423 D9AE 02FD
    A711 97BA
    ***[14C6D183] Signed: 5/4/04 7:36:34 AM
    ***[14C6D183] Verified: 5/4/04 11:27:59 AM

    --

    Bart

  19. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    In Message-ID:
    posted on Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:44:29 GMT, Casey wrote: Begin:

    >I know Imad stated on his web page, not use CKT build 09 beta.


    I've been using it (09beta3) since it was released and haven't
    encountered any anomalies. Nor have I heard of any.
    Has anyone found anything yet?

    --

    Bart

  20. Re: What happened to Imad Faiad?

    In article <40e982f7.5774574@bart.spawar.mil>, me2@privacy.net says...
    > In Message-ID:
    > posted on Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:44:29 GMT, Casey wrote: Begin:
    >
    > >I know Imad stated on his web page, not use CKT build 09 beta.

    >
    > I've been using it (09beta3) since it was released and haven't
    > encountered any anomalies. Nor have I heard of any.
    > Has anyone found anything yet?
    >
    >

    I don't use pgp much but I have 09beta1 installed. It has always
    tested out without any problems.
    Casey

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast