On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 09:42:32AM +0100, Axel H Horns wrote: > On 3 Jan 2070, at 9:41, Nicholas Brawn wrote: > > > What's the state of the game with PGP and GPG compatibility? > > Interesting question. > > I'm using PGP 6.5.8 for my professional confidential e-mails and > sometimes I get complaints from GnuPG users saying they can't use my > Pubkey. > > Currently I'm preparing an article on Internet security issues > related to the businesses of attorneys-at-law and patent attorneys. > In this context, it is already a hard job to promote usage of e-mail > encryption, and such incompatibilities between various versions of > PGP and GnuPG marke it even harder.
I recently spent a good bit of time working out various compatibility issues between GnuPG and different versions of PGP. In the process, I added a --pgp2 flag to the new (not yet released) GnuPG which sets up the various options for a PGP 2.x message, and also prints a warning if the user does something that would render the message not PGP 2.x compatible. I've gotten some interest in a --pgp6 flag, but there is less of a need for this as the default options in GnuPG now do the right thing for PGP 6/7 in nearly all circumstances within the constrains of the RFC. Plus, a --pgp6 would then imply a --pgp7 followed by a --pgp8 someday and it's a path I'm reluctant to head down. :) David -- David Shaw | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | WWW http://www.jabberwocky.com/ +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ "There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
