Rex, et al --
...and then rex said...
% On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 12:59:22PM +0000, Tom Friedetzky wrote:
% > On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 12:35:35PM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote:
% >
% > > ... you add +encrypttoself to these commands.
% >
% > This does the trick nicely. Thanks a lot!
%
% Don't forget that _anyone_ who has access to the encrypted message can
Yup. And thanks for bringing it up for the new folks, too.
% then see that you are one of the recipients. If you're sending
% anonymous mail, or do not want a link between yourself and the
% recipient, this is a BIG security hole.
<offtopic>
Hasn't anyone else thought of creating a separate PGP key pair for your
anonymous identity so that you *can* encrypttoself your anonymous mail?
You don't even have to publish the public key, and why would you want to?
You could even (if you were a real nutcase :-) create a separate anon key
pair for each recipient or, for the truly paranoid, for each email.
And mutt would make it all easy to manage :-)
</offtopic>
We now return you to your regularly scheduled discussions.
:-D
--
David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles
(play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie
(work) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.bigfoot.com/~davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
The "new millennium" starts at the beginning of 2001. There was no year 0.
Note: If bigfoot.com gives you fits, try sector13.org in its place. *sigh*
PGP signature
