Tim May wrote: > > At 5:29 PM -0500 8/19/00, Adam Back wrote: > ><<<mailcrypt patch>>> > > Dimitri, > > I ran the mailcrypto-3.5.x patch on our systems, and now our hard > drives have been erased. > > Why did you attach the name "Adam Back" to your message, by the way? > > (My point being that I wonder why Adam didn't sign his patch > messages. Perhaps I missed a signature embedded in the patches > themselves, which I didn't look at. Given the recent spate of > malicious viruses, a "patch" to a critical subsystem seems like the > last thing people should just load and run without knowing precisely > where it came from.) I just read the patch file. No digital signature, though there is an author line. Nothing obviously malicious leaps out at me. I did _not_ apply the patch and then read the entire mailcrypt file, so _maybe_ something was done which was not obvious from the patch alone. > No, I don't sign my messages. But I am also not sending out patches > and executables. > > (Not counting lists of burrowcrats I may send out.) Ha-ha. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
