Dear Sir / Madame
Good-day. I am enquiring further about the GnuGP Encryption Software.
I hope you are can assist.
I am interested to learn about:
1. the functionality of the software
2. the licensing structure(s) of the software and associated prices for
licensing
You can find most (if not all) of the answers you're looking for at
http://gnupg.org/
After reading the material there if you still have questions, fire away.
Doug
On 03/02/2011 06:56, Mizana ;) wrote:
/*Dear Sir / Madame */
/*Good-day. I am enquiring further about the GnuGP Encryption Soft
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Wednesday 2 March 2011 at 4:07:19 AM, in
, Robert J.
Hansen wrote:
>> The benefits of your phone number being ex-directory
>> are the benefits that derive from it being harder for
>> people to obtain your phone number without your
>> permis
> 1. the functionality of the software
It implements RFC4880. All MUST functions, as well as the overwhelming
majority of SHOULDs (perhaps all!), are supported.
> 2. the licensing structure(s) of the software and
> associated prices for licensing
GNU GPL v3. How much it costs depends on from w
On 03/02/2011 02:25 PM, MFPA wrote:
> For somebody who uses the same email address to communicate with many
> contacts and keeps the same email address for a long time, that is
> true. For somebody like me who uses various different email addresses
> and replaces some of them on a regular basis it
On 3/2/11 2:25 PM, MFPA wrote:
> Once, maybe. But for quite a few years (in the UK at least) there have
> been many competing directory enquiries services, and more recently
> the online versions as well. Choosing to be ex-directory is a
> binding instruction to your telephone company not to releas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Wednesday 2 March 2011 at 8:27:50 PM, in
, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> The analogy continues to break down. "Binding," in the
> context of the analogy, means "if someone breaks this
> instruction, they will be hurt." Maybe the government
>
On 3/2/11 6:34 PM, MFPA wrote:
> You are going off at a tangent. The mechanism for preventing the phone
> number being obtainable from a query of the phone book or directory
> enquiry services is not relevant; just the fact that it can easily be
> done.
It's not a tangent at all, and for almost th
On 1/03/11 1:20 PM, Grant Olson wrote:
>
> I wouldn't mind testing to help out, but I'm not throwing away my
> current key anytime soon.
Ah ha! Another hint about the scav hunt. ;)
More seriously, I've been through this discussion with MFPA before and
I can see some circumstances where his ide
On 3/2/11 7:37 PM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> More seriously, I've been through this discussion with MFPA before and
> I can see some circumstances where his idea might have merit, so I'd
> be willing to help test too.
Same here. I am deeply skeptical, but not unwilling to be proven wrong.
IMPOSSIBLE
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Wednesday 2 March 2011 at 8:14:08 PM, in
, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> it sounds to me like you've simply made it difficult
> for people to correspond with you over long periods of
> time because your e-mail address isn't likely to
> conti
On 1/03/11 9:33 AM, David Shaw wrote:
>
> That experiment, while interesting, is not relevant to the "real
> Martin" / "fake Martin" situation we've been talking about. If both
> Real Martin and Fake Martin have the same secret key, then there is
> no way to tell them apart using signatures.
Han
On 2/03/11 8:20 AM, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
>
> Of course, my experience is from a time when UTF-8 wasn't used in email.
> But do the standard mail clients (Outlook, GMail, Thunderbird) really
> default to UTF-8 nowadays? Expecting people to properly configure their
> mail clients is an unrealistic
On Mar 2, 2011, at 10:04 PM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 1/03/11 9:33 AM, David Shaw wrote:
>>
>> That experiment, while interesting, is not relevant to the "real
>> Martin" / "fake Martin" situation we've been talking about. If both
>> Real Martin and Fake Martin have the same secret key, then the
On 3/03/11 3:17 PM, David Shaw wrote:
>
> The premise (more or less) was that a guy named Martin (RM) was on a
> mailing list and signed all his mail. After some time, a new guy
> (FM) shows up and claims that he is, in fact, Martin. FM may have
> his own key or may not have a key at all. It do
15 matches
Mail list logo
