Who uses PGP/GPG? - PGP

This is a discussion on Who uses PGP/GPG? - PGP ; Hi there, a few years ago some ppl was ready to use PGP, but nowadays each time I ask for secure transmissions (e-mail stuff) nobody seems to know about PGP/GPG. I think *PG it's easier than ever to use and ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Who uses PGP/GPG?

  1. Who uses PGP/GPG?

    Hi there,

    a few years ago some ppl was ready to use PGP, but nowadays each time
    I ask for secure transmissions (e-mail stuff) nobody seems to know
    about PGP/GPG.

    I think *PG it's easier than ever to use and quite friendly, so maybe
    is it time to advertise the dangers of open transmissions and the value
    of this software?

    Maybe it, somehow, would make life easier. But that's just a thought.


  2. Re: Who uses PGP/GPG?

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

    cotefenetre@yahoo.com writes:

    > a few years ago some ppl was ready to use PGP, but nowadays each time
    >I ask for secure transmissions (e-mail stuff) nobody seems to know
    >about PGP/GPG.


    >I think *PG it's easier than ever to use and quite friendly, so maybe
    >is it time to advertise the dangers of open transmissions and the value
    >of this software?


    Quite a few people use it. But most messages don't need to be
    secret. So I often see pgp signed email, but encrypted email is not
    nearly as common.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (SunOS)

    iD8DBQFCuL/7vmGe70vHPUMRAkSFAJ9rki1Ps5sSqoNOQr5nxPfVyrFtVwCdG dnX
    09bX7k5jpQvUayHAaBk80Ps=
    =2PXP
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  3. Re: Who uses PGP/GPG?

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

    cotefenetre@yahoo.com wrote in
    news:1119391021.485126.207780@g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com:

    > Hi there,
    >
    > a few years ago some ppl was ready to use PGP, but nowadays each time
    > I ask for secure transmissions (e-mail stuff) nobody seems to know
    > about PGP/GPG.
    >
    > I think *PG it's easier than ever to use and quite friendly, so maybe
    > is it time to advertise the dangers of open transmissions and the value
    > of this software?
    >
    > Maybe it, somehow, would make life easier. But that's just a thought.


    I'm hoping that PGP 9.x will lead to more routine use of encryption. I
    know it does for me, with the Email Proxy (that even works with my favorite
    email client - Pegasus). With earlier PGP versions, I had to know whether
    I had a key for the person, and then actively choose to encrypt. With
    9.0.1, it is automatic - if my keyring has a valid key for the recipient,
    or if the recipient has a key on the Global Directory, it is encrypted
    (along with any attachments).

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.1 (Build 2185)
    Comment: PGP FAQ: http://www.mccune.cc/PGP.htm

    iQEVAwUBQrjJ0mDeI9apM77TAQL/bwf/TS/uETbdIvcG3Eh4jdMPALiJnNrZKq+v
    Juuz3GEd7Gme/s2ChbeW30hXaBTAkmFRPysVxtIuZH+JJwuRkbL0cD6YqdmgxuD D
    WoTm6bws0LK+8TpM+nq2KsZe6jNhHFKeL1aCTb54/fory2OibuMS/f+jpXF/4TjE
    jan/aqs4cFS0DQGhDv3950bL8I3xldEUX40K/miRCBEfFpF1qjWm0s5EVbicjW0C
    H1LkLf6DoGjbYCKM4ZP7NqvzXEii8RDCCsHbu8I7/0nppLtXG/hCQP5ozuu2j24g
    g3S0UOBbj+rcegfTJEwT8+T5tMp0mEWQnRxlELMcBaTZFWkXAp qw8g==
    =wc75
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  4. Re: Who uses PGP/GPG?

    On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 02:15:45 GMT, Tom McCune
    wrote:

    >
    > I'm hoping that PGP 9.x will lead to more routine use of encryption. I
    > know it does for me, with the Email Proxy (that even works with my favorite
    > email client - Pegasus). With earlier PGP versions, I had to know whether
    > I had a key for the person, and then actively choose to encrypt. With
    > 9.0.1, it is automatic - if my keyring has a valid key for the recipient,
    > or if the recipient has a key on the Global Directory, it is encrypted
    > (along with any attachments).


    You could have had all this before by using my PGP extension for Pegasus
    Mail ...


    Michael

    --
    PGP Key ID (RSA 2048): 0xC45D831B
    PGP Plugin for Pegasus Mail:

  5. Re: Who uses PGP/GPG?

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

    cotefenetre@yahoo.com wrote:
    > Hi there,
    >
    > a few years ago some ppl was ready to use PGP, but nowadays each time
    > I ask for secure transmissions (e-mail stuff) nobody seems to know
    > about PGP/GPG.
    >
    > I think *PG it's easier than ever to use and quite friendly, so maybe
    > is it time to advertise the dangers of open transmissions and the value
    > of this software?
    >


    I suppose a lot of people do not care about privacy anymore or never
    cared about it anyway.

    I know a lot of guys which would be skilled enough to use PGP/GnuPG.
    I even told them about PGP and GnuPG, but they just don't bother to use
    PGP/GnuGP.

    - --
    Robert Bachmann (OpenPGP KeyID: 0x4A5CCF10)
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)

    iD8DBQFCuTt3mnUcPUpczxARApKIAJwJEx20Q6OC0EDk+A4hmQ UmtaYx3QCfbp29
    ZSDXViJuOOgJJE7m6JubbuA=
    =0o8P
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  6. Re: Who uses PGP/GPG?

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

    Michael in der Wiesche <---idw.doc---@t-online.de> wrote in
    news:2fshb15jv115n6i9egba5knrqglc5n648v@4ax.com:

    >> I'm hoping that PGP 9.x will lead to more routine use of encryption. I
    >> know it does for me, with the Email Proxy (that even works with my
    >> favorite email client - Pegasus). With earlier PGP versions, I had to
    >> know whether I had a key for the person, and then actively choose to
    >> encrypt. With 9.0.1, it is automatic - if my keyring has a valid key
    >> for the recipient, or if the recipient has a key on the Global
    >> Directory, it is encrypted (along with any attachments).

    >
    > You could have had all this before by using my PGP extension for Pegasus
    > Mail ...


    Hi Michael,

    Back when I used a plug-in for Pegasus, it was QDPGP that was available.
    It worked well for what a plug-in does, and I suspect that your plug-in
    does too.

    However, with QDPGP, I still had to manually choose with each email whether
    you wanted to encrypt, etc. I suspect that is also so with yours. And if
    you chose to encrypt, and there was no key with that email address to
    encrypt to, it sent a blank email message (I can only guess that yours
    might do this as well, since this was apparently caused by Pegasus itself).

    With PGP 9.x, I can also set up policies to predetermine who is or is not
    encrypted to, who is or is not receiving signed and/or signed and encrypted
    email, who does or does not have email blocked if some condition is not
    met, what key is used for some particular individual or email address
    regardless of what is on the key ID, etc.

    You can basically set up what ever you want to do for whoever (and/or for
    whole domains), and then it all happens without giving any thought to it.
    This is why I actually now use more encryption. I especially use to hate
    it when I chose to use encryption, and because of that wound up sending out
    blank email.


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.1 (Build 2185)
    Comment: PGP FAQ: http://www.mccune.cc/PGP.htm

    iQEVAwUBQrlCcWDeI9apM77TAQK/ggf+NN8WjmnZ61unRy2vjrjaw8RaFQUwQmq9
    wLzHXeQkkXvROQVo8xGURpo1PuukE7Z5u0VObNeKUL3bfgkXDP ylqOgf3dW6ucjA
    u5ubLH7Xr6k4p3Z3WpafOCd/zludO227nA+yOnxRxS4wHSSZ4oD7Om2Y0L0orema
    qlPOZtsGxx2248C2glihN12LTtEDLRLHgM+VQ1VfrbTT2CtM6b gFSnhZu3DnCTUa
    xQvNyr7mdJ2NE10AaOnpNjH3Sxhf6kQbw6mhVXV5Ew0V95D352 +lownTTL5b+vnW
    7bA2OImep9zEfCW0e5XcwWArI7hFJNWdTtL2LmvDiDCaj0BqIF QrhQ==
    =DPYK
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  7. Re: Who uses PGP/GPG?

    On 2005-06-22, Robert Bachmann wrote:
    > I know a lot of guys which would be skilled enough to use PGP/GnuPG.
    > I even told them about PGP and GnuPG, but they just don't bother to use
    > PGP/GnuGP.


    Exactly! :-(

    > Robert Bachmann (OpenPGP KeyID: 0x4A5CCF10)


    Regards,

    --
    hondza aka "kinderzrout" | GPG key: http://www.hondza.adslink.cz/key.asc
    Fingerprint: 31E7 EF56 7280 5C89 75E9 FF9D 010E 175F 7823 CF38
    :wq

  8. Re: Who uses PGP/GPG?

    On 21 Jun 2005 14:57:01 -0700, cotefenetre@yahoo.com wrote:

    >Hi there,
    >
    > a few years ago some ppl was ready to use PGP, but nowadays each time
    >I ask for secure transmissions (e-mail stuff) nobody seems to know
    >about PGP/GPG.
    >
    >I think *PG it's easier than ever to use and quite friendly, so maybe
    >is it time to advertise the dangers of open transmissions and the value
    >of this software?
    >
    >Maybe it, somehow, would make life easier. But that's just a thought.


    I will speak for myself. I donīt think PGP is easy to use. And it's
    not as much the software but a whole set of different usability
    aspects.

    Managing private keys and passphrases in a secure way I find
    particularly challenging. As I read through FAQs and user posts I
    realize how easy it is to foul up and expose yourself. It's disastrous
    because you have a false sense of security. Training goes much beyond
    learning a piece of software.

    There are issues with different versions of PGP applications. As I
    experimented with one application I found it could not recognize
    certain signatures created by other programs/versions. And there is
    always the chance your email client will screw everything up by
    inserting wordwraps or whatever. I think to myself "this system is not
    reliable, when I really need it it's not going to work...".

    And then there's the software itself. PGP 9, which I reckon most
    newcomers would try first as it is the "official" program has problems
    itself. PGP 9 completely hosed my system stability. I'm sure
    eventually they'll get it right but it just adds to the argument that
    it's not ready for mass usage.

    The one time I actually needed PGP to work, the other guy did not have
    a public key (which is a reality, low coverage makes it less usable).
    I used a self-exctracting PGP file with a long passphrase. It didn't
    work because his OS was different than mine... And that's something
    you take hours to find out why.

    I consider myself to be computer savvy. But I look at this solution
    and I can only conclude that I am going to get a lot of headaches
    using it and no peace of mind. It's probably easier to send a fax and
    have the other guy stand in front of the fax machine. Of course if I
    *really* need secure communications I'll just take a deep breath and
    use it anyway. But for swapping emails with my friends? Forget it.

    And I think it all comes down to that. There is a lot of investment in
    time to get it right and unless you really really need it your not
    going to take the dive.



  9. Re: Who uses PGP/GPG?

    cotefenetre@yahoo.com wrote:
    >
    > Hi there,
    >
    > a few years ago some ppl was ready to use PGP, but nowadays each time
    > I ask for secure transmissions (e-mail stuff) nobody seems to know
    > about PGP/GPG.
    >
    > I think *PG it's easier than ever to use and quite friendly, so maybe
    > is it time to advertise the dangers of open transmissions and the value
    > of this software?
    >
    > Maybe it, somehow, would make life easier. But that's just a thought.


    You might tell your friends about my
    .

    --

    David E. Ross


    I use Mozilla as my Web browser because I want a browser that
    complies with Web standards. See .

  10. Re: Who uses PGP/GPG?

    On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:33:51 +0000 (UTC), Neil W Rickert
    wrote:

    >Quite a few people use it. But most messages don't need to be
    >secret. So I often see pgp signed email, but encrypted email is not
    >nearly as common.


    I can't agree with you any more.

  11. Re: Who uses PGP/GPG?

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

    On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:50:24 GMT, Tom McCune wrote:

    > Michael in der Wiesche <---idw.doc---@t-online.de> wrote in
    > news:2fshb15jv115n6i9egba5knrqglc5n648v@4ax.com:
    >
    > >> I'm hoping that PGP 9.x will lead to more routine use of encryption. I
    > >> know it does for me, with the Email Proxy (that even works with my
    > >> favorite email client - Pegasus). With earlier PGP versions, I had to
    > >> know whether I had a key for the person, and then actively choose to
    > >> encrypt. With 9.0.1, it is automatic - if my keyring has a valid key
    > >> for the recipient, or if the recipient has a key on the Global
    > >> Directory, it is encrypted (along with any attachments).

    > >
    > > You could have had all this before by using my PGP extension for Pegasus Mail ...

    >
    > Hi Michael,
    >
    > Back when I used a plug-in for Pegasus, it was QDPGP that was available.
    > It worked well for what a plug-in does, and I suspect that your plug-in
    > does too.
    >
    > However, with QDPGP, I still had to manually choose with each email whether
    > you wanted to encrypt, etc. I suspect that is also so with yours.
    >


    Once options are set for the recipients, signing and/or encryption is
    done automatically with Michael's extension via its AutoPush module.


    > And if you chose to encrypt, and there was no key with that email address
    > to encrypt to, it sent a blank email message (I can only guess that yours
    > might do this as well, since this was apparently caused by Pegasus itself).
    >



    If the recipeint is not setup in the AutoPush, one is given the
    option of looking up the key on a keyserver. If one declines or the
    no matching key is found, the options presented are to send the
    message in the clear or to copy the message to a new mail and delete
    the original. I've never had Michael's extension send a blank mail.


    Of the points you made Michael's extension will...

    > set up policies to predetermine who is or is not encrypted to
    >


    Yes

    > who is or is not receiving signed and/or signed and encrypted email
    >


    Yes

    >who does or does not have email blocked if some condition is not met
    >


    No I don't think so, but I don't understand that feature.

    >what key is used for some particular individual or email address regardless of what is on the key ID, etc.
    >


    Yes

    Regards,
    Guy



    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: idw's PGP-Frontend 4.9.6.4 / 6-2004 + PGP 6.5.8
    Comment: Use Encryption for Privacy and Authentication.

    iQEVAwUBQseyWxh5UWHiLTkFAQOFbAgAruU4H4XF8TdHhw6nGl z5+xyR3Tx01wQO
    IfaGEZ5iNOAkzAQIXsMBpclEbR73WaerUX+RZh2ocrXyCVRhSJ FxBatsu8jPAZre
    aXfd7ie2rD9CmnAU4tDteicFyFy1jVAECU7IG6gg1eOvLEd2GO nvuO50zOhzrMsz
    RSPTIP931KQO8qD0Q3Vbc7IaB07zoEPYLTC3Y9koK/Uh7KEYSZ2PHqBwiAvpIXpU
    jW9vp5O76Mt+/ThIsySjpdtFnWGeVoQvAovv2JJbAhcHlgwfrUUA7OXE0lQgp+r Y
    d3v9O7Xjfg7PWLfNHQ6VXvvq7w0Y/Vv/n4x307VsJ/Q4FWqHrdrjcw==
    =RLqg
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  12. Re: Who uses PGP/GPG?

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

    Hi Guy,

    Thanks for the informative post. I has been years since I used QDPGP
    and/or looked at Michael's extension. It sounds like things have really
    progressed.

    > Once options are set for the recipients, signing and/or encryption is
    > done automatically with Michael's extension via its AutoPush module.


    This is impressive, and sounds much like PGP's Email Proxy's policies.

    > If the recipeint is not setup in the AutoPush, one is given the
    > option of looking up the key on a keyserver. If one declines or the
    > no matching key is found, the options presented are to send the
    > message in the clear or to copy the message to a new mail and delete
    > the original. I've never had Michael's extension send a blank mail.


    This all sounds very good. It is more manual than the automatic policies
    you set in PGP 9.x, but it is arguable which is more desirable: more
    individualistic control, or greater ease of automation and transparency.

    > Of the points you made Michael's extension will...
    >
    >> set up policies to predetermine who is or is not encrypted to

    >
    > Yes
    >
    >> who is or is not receiving signed and/or signed and encrypted email

    >
    > Yes
    >
    >>who does or does not have email blocked if some condition is not met

    >
    > No I don't think so, but I don't understand that feature.


    That was not worded well. I was trying to comment on the flexibility of
    the 9.x policies.

    >>what key is used for some particular individual or email address
    >>regardless of what is on the key ID, etc.

    >
    > Yes


    It really does sound very good.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.1 (Build 2185)
    Comment: PGP FAQ: http://www.mccune.cc/PGP.htm

    iQEVAwUBQsfhS2DeI9apM77TAQKg2gf+IesaQV20AHMB4Q+5vj SvZGncgxvEJYVU
    Y4yNMxUuS+ZqYyayKCRbzgz+IIwCd1vTfph3NSB5txX7362pTt koWVszlcVrm5XF
    dcTqx4G2MwT01s8aJgC+cNAqoKBSR3i0BQcRn5g4pQS8tZ+Lyi v1v7mPINM4I/m+
    KOODnyqPj5+hvdRXds5qT4Oj3ARJwi/v1or4vyTl0Yaza9Jf8xHuBdbiBXfMxvHr
    epVlKAeDXwIjGg9wDQFbOeByElF0znOpj3hG+vAYyq/gBG7zLDakf2yxDfLU7qW1
    /HujYKGp7HHtTh7Wt6L/W8bo9LdgnLhcR6su6kFO+gNeIApWuL5HRQ==
    =cnyv
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

+ Reply to Thread