> And then there's what Jamie said: By all being private, we make the > truly private stand out less. I haven't yet gotten to the point of > using privacy I don't need personally, as is obvious by this unsigned > email.
> SteveT A friend of mine has a bit of a conspiracy theory going - asking why there is no e-mail program that defaults to at *least* signing messages cryptographically, if not using encryption as a default. He has a point: none of the major distros set up their e-mail clients to default to signing, or anything - why not? Sure, it's not the super-privacy-protective that heads or tails provides, but signing at least provides some confirmation that things haven't been changed along the way. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
