Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
Hi The_Bat! Users, ,--- ( Tuesday, October 21, 2003 - rich gregory Wrote ) | But you just told me NOT to go in thru Tools | PGP!!! | Anyway, maybe this will help... My PGP mgr is different than | yours. | http://mudshark.com/pgp-mgr-diff.gif `--- It looks like you have a very old version. -- Regards, John Current version is 2.01.3 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
On Wednesday, October 22, 2003 at 10:08:54 AM, John Morse wrote in the message 2.01.00 Release (PGP) mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: But you just told me NOT to go in thru Tools | PGP!!! Anyway, maybe this will help... My PGP mgr is different than yours. http://mudshark.com/pgp-mgr-diff.gif It looks like you have a very old version. No. That's the built-in key manager. -- Chris Quoting when replying to this message is good for your karma. Today's Oxymoron: Legally drunk Using The Bat! v2.01.3 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01.3 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
Hi The_Bat! Users, Wednesday, October 22, 2003, 5:42:24 PM, you wrote: C No. That's the built-in key manager. Then go to [Tools | OpenPGP | Choose OpenPGP Version] Then choose PGP 5,6,7,8, (built in support) You probably have Internal selected here, and that is why you are not seeing the menus that have been mentioned. -- Regards, John Current version is 2.01.3 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello John, On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] RW And I've signed this one. Just had a look at your PGP key and imported RW but I suppose I now need your private key. I'm getting there. No, you don't need my private key, that is only for me... just as your private key is only for you. All you will need is my Public key to send me an encrypted message. I've got that and I've now posted mine to : http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCA93B5BE Thanks for all your help and I really think I'm getting there. If this message is signed I'll even have got my templates working properly! - -- Best regards, Richard | Using The Bat! 2.01.3 SpamPal | Windows 2000 (build 2195), version 5.0 Service Pack 4 | and using the best browser: Opera7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP SDK 3.0.2 iQA/AwUBP5WSKBqZtcDKk7W+EQI44QCgrVCm+FfO+Pfsnie9xWR7Wqe7MMwAn0/P /TbwS99GYeMB51k5SDTbkFoT =kxpW -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.01.3 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Richard, On Oct 21, 2003, 21:08 +0100 ( 4:08 PM here), Richard Wakeford [RW] wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: RW Thanks for all your help and I really think I'm getting there. If RW this message is signed I'll even have got my templates working RW properly! Looks good over here, Richard. gpg: Signature made 10/21/03 16:08:08 Eastern Daylight Time using DSA key ID CA93B5BE gpg: Good signature from Richard Wakeford [EMAIL PROTECTED] gpg: aka [jpeg image of size 5290] - -- Kevin Coates Dewitt, NY USA Using TB! v2.01.3 under Windows XP 5.1.2600 SP1 (see kludges for my pgp key) . -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQE/lZ+qRbTFvUNHmLkRAmN8AJ9ZCuBlMQx3DQifnZ9GCQId0WmfiwCfTvOg /e6k4xZqHtl9Eya/dpr6S0s= =Ri13 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.01.3 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
Hi The_Bat! Users, ,--- ( Tuesday, October 21, 2003 - rich gregory Wrote ) | rg How did you get to that PGPkeys window in the first place? `--- Tools | OpenPGP | Open PGP Key Manager Here is a screenshot for this: http://legacy.sheltonbbs.com/~jmmorse/pgp_key_manager.gif -- Regards, John Current version is 2.01.3 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
Hi Nigel, @20-Oct-2003, 09:25 Nigel Shortell [NS] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to John: J I couldn't get your key, it said unknown key NS 20 October 2003 09:17:53: I don't know what I am doing wrong NS but I have this morning uploaded keys to Public Key: NS idap://europe.keys.pgp.com:11370. Please try again gpg: Signature made 10/20/03 09:24:50 using DSA key ID 7CE0318D gpg: Good signature from Nigel Shortell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v2.01.2 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
Hello Vishal, Monday, October 20, 2003, 2:29:01 AM, you wrote: V That's exactly what I meant. If all 5 people have the same public V key, they would all also need a copy of the private key to decrypt V it. No, if you encrypt a message using my public key, and Marck's public key, and Allie's public key, then any one of us could decrypt the message using our own private key. I won't pretend I know how it works, but it's not encryption on encryption, but a way of encrypting it that any one of use could decrypt it using our own private key. V What exactly do you mean by 'using all 5 public keys'? Successive V encryption using 5 different keys? If that were the case, any one V of the private keys would not be enough to decrypt it. Using any V one of them would only yield the ciphertext produced by the V previous iteration. No, see above. -- Leif (TB list moderator and fellow end user). Using The Bat! 2.01 under Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 on a Pentium 4 2GHz with 512MB Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hello Richard, Sunday, October 19, 2003, 12:58:59 PM, you wrote: snip RW I still, personally, fail to see the benefits a humble citizen RW with nothing to hide (well not yet anyway) can benefit from having RW yet another gizzmo to add to things but I am willing to be RW persuaded (slowly!). Here's a way that makes the most sense (I think). When you send an e-mail, it leaves your machine and passes through X number of mail servers along the way. It could be just a couple, or it could be five or six. At any point when your message passes through a mail server, an unscrupulous mail admin could be reading your e-mail. While you may be saying nothing of importance, the point is, that it invades your privacy. Sending unencrypted e-mail is like sending a postcard, where the mailperson could be reading it as he/she walks down the street and giggling over the wish you were here message from your mom. Contrast that with encrypting which is akin to sending the letter sealed in an envelope. Not exactly the same but close enough to make the point. It's not that people have something to hide (or most of us don't), it's that you should have the assurance, peace-of-mind, and the right to privacy. -- Leif (TB list moderator and fellow end user). Using The Bat! 2.01 under Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 on a Pentium 4 2GHz with 512MB Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
Hello rich, Sunday, October 19, 2003, 8:27:17 PM, you wrote: rg Where do I find server | send to? The only PGP options (all rg under Tools) I see are: rg Choose version rg Key manager rg Preferences Do it from within the Key Manager. -- Leif (TB list moderator and fellow end user). Using The Bat! 2.01 under Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 on a Pentium 4 2GHz with 512MB Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
Hello rich, Sunday, October 19, 2003, 8:27:17 PM, you wrote: rg rg Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: rg http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html moderator This moderator's interjection is a note to all readers and not just to the person being replied to, even if their post may have instigated this reply. Please don't feel singled out rich. Please include a signature delimiter in your messages. This consists of a dashdashspacereturn, i.e., a '-- ' by itself on a line. This allows your readers, when replying, to quote your text without the signature and list footers since everything below and including the sig delimiter is excluded when quoting. You can easily automate this process by including the sig delimiter in your templates. Thank you. /moderator -- Leif (TB list moderator and fellow end user). Using The Bat! 2.01 under Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 on a Pentium 4 2GHz with 512MB pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
Hi Pixie, on Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:25:09 -0400GMT (20.10.03, 18:25 +0200GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : P Public keys are a nice source of valid email addresses. I expect there P is public key harvesting going on.. I don't believe so, as only few of my addresses on my key get spammed. It would be most stupid anyway. You can expect PGP users to be particularly conscious about what's happening on the internet, compared to the usual AOLer. So it wouldn't do them /any/ good to harvest here.*G* -- Cheers Peter When I was a kid, I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized that the Lord, in his wisdom, didn't work that way. So I stole one and asked him to forgive me. Winamp currently playing: Rattles - Cauliflower pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hi Leif, on Mon, 20 Oct 2003 08:59:48 -0600GMT (20.10.03, 16:59 +0200GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : ... LG Sending unencrypted e-mail is like sending a postcard, where the LG mailperson could be reading it as he/she walks down the street and LG giggling over the wish you were here message from your mom. I'd like to add, it is like a postcard written with a pencil. Alterations on its way are easy. And easily detectable if the message was PGP signed. :-) LG It's not that people have something to hide (or most of us don't), LG it's that you should have the assurance, peace-of-mind, and the right LG to privacy. It should become /normal/ to encrypt private mails, as it is normal to put private letters in envelopes. Otherwise we'll end up with the public opinion that encryption is *indeed* only for those who have something to hide... -- Cheers Peter If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy. Winamp currently playing: George Benson - Take Five pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
Hello Vishal, Monday, October 20, 2003, 11:32:03 AM, you wrote: V *Yes*. All 5 would have to have the private key to decrypt this V message, if it were encrypted using the *same* public key. Ahhh. Hence my confusion over your question. I honestly can't think of a situation where five people would share a key. I can see in a corporate situation where five people might be on a corporate keyring, but each with their own sub-key. The idea behind PGP being that each person is uniquely identifiable and verifiable. V We are talking about different things. You're talking about V multiple recipients for one message, which indeed works as you V described. I am talking about encrypting multiple times, with the V base for the new iteration being the ciphertext produced by the V previous one. A message/file encrypted using this procedure could V not be decrypted by simply using any one of the recipients' private V keys. Yes, if you wanted to layer encryption, you could recursively feed the output of one crypto to the next. Again, why? Unless you're maybe passing high level secrets, then maybe, but for standard end users? -- Leif (TB list moderator and fellow end user). Using The Bat! 2.01 under Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 on a Pentium 4 2GHz with 512MB Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hello Peter, Monday, October 20, 2003, 11:26:54 AM, you wrote: PM I'd like to add, it is like a postcard written with a pencil. PM Alterations on its way are easy. And easily detectable if the PM message was PGP signed. :-) Absorutetry Raggy! grin (Scooby-Doo) PM It should become /normal/ to encrypt private mails, as it is PM normal to put private letters in envelopes. Otherwise we'll end up PM with the public opinion that encryption is *indeed* only for those PM who have something to hide... Again! It should be a default for installation. -- Leif (TB list moderator and fellow end user). Using The Bat! 2.01 under Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 on a Pentium 4 2GHz with 512MB Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi The_Bat! Users, Monday, October 20, 2003, 11:40:47 AM, you wrote: rg On my copy of TB! (2.00.6) Server | Send to is NOT rg available under the key manager, or any other option, in Tools | rg PGP Don't look for Tools, just open the key manager and then server|send to Here is a screenshot http://legacy.sheltonbbs.com/~jmmorse/pgp_screenshot.gif - -- Regards, John My Public PGP Key Can Be Found Here http://legacy.sheltonbbs.com/~jmmorse/pgp.html -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP SDK 3.0.2 iQA/AwUBP5Q0pGDExQtRQTHTEQIniQCgl8m/F/VXAdYemz1fg9zNcSP8iPYAoJwo eXa2D8HysNRl4twAOq/j7/1P =Ksfu -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
RE:2.01.00 Release
Hello Leif, Monday, October 20, 2003, 8:24:08 PM, you wrote: Monday, October 20, 2003, 11:26:54 AM, you wrote: PM I'd like to add, it is like a postcard written with a pencil. PM Alterations on its way are easy. And easily detectable if the PM message was PGP signed. :-) Absorutetry Raggy! grin (Scooby-Doo) PM It should become /normal/ to encrypt private mails, as it is PM normal to put private letters in envelopes. Otherwise we'll end up PM with the public opinion that encryption is *indeed* only for those PM who have something to hide... Again! It should be a default for installation. the NSA wouldn't like that. -- Regards, Jurgen Never trust a man who can count to 1023 on his fingers Using The Bat! v2.01 http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/index.html pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hello Allie, On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] JM Thanks Mr. Raftery! I've tried to read up on it on some of the JM websites about PGP, but its like a foreign language to me, I just JM don't understand how it works. Is there a PGP 101 site :) Ah great. :) I'd be willing to entertain any questions you may wish to send my way via private mail. I'm always happy when these PGP discussions perk the interest of someone not using it. The more people that use it, the more it will become useful and effective. The others have provided useful links. I don't have any to add. The only thing I'd suggest is installing one of them and actually trying it. OK, I'm going to jump in here as I've never been the slightest bit interested in PGP as John isn't and he has very much voiced my thoughts on the matter. In fact I had (now just removed) a filter to ignore all PGP titled mails. However, as such eminent people as yourself and DG Raftery Sr have extolled the virtues of PGP, I am now about to look at the sites you recommended to see what I can fathom out. I still, personally, fail to see the benefits a humble citizen with nothing to hide (well not yet anyway) can benefit from having yet another gizzmo to add to things but I am willing to be persuaded (slowly!). -- Best regards, Richard | Using The Bat! 2.01 SpamPal | Windows 2000 (build 2195), version 5.0 Service Pack 4 | and using the best browser: Opera7 Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi The_Bat! Users, Sunday, October 19, 2003, 1:58:59 PM, you wrote: RW OK, I'm going to jump in here as I've never been the slightest bit RW interested in PGP as John isn't and he has very much voiced my RW thoughts on the matter. In fact I had (now just removed) a filter to RW ignore all PGP titled mails. I removed my filter too, once a few nice people helped me off list. Its neat that you can send an encrypted message and no one can read what it says except the person that you encrypted it to...Not even your Internet provider, etc. For example only 5 people (who's keys I have) can read what I encrypted below: - -BEGIN PGP MESSAGE- Version: PGP 7.0.4 qANQR1DBwU4D/3jJIZ9Gz7kQB/0aCYYLtF67p8i/mHxpjmI6mPTuf2SwCQJ0mV+L Ze5NZjQDQD78YSkXanR/ivmtNO3/5qMwJ2Dnf4/K22gGnygGOKUq6rPJrAQwkXWS drsN2G68McVC3/1jpO4S2LJBrpR6dEOI4vpOY6gU3CfkIQjOOfUNtiJ/aoeF5UtU FmjNT4U63b1397Rc/N0BWDAx/sXwfvFpCKX4PyGTeVwJQi7z/cVUrCpcbf9dCPHh UPU9DzgksUeobCR+dV7Ufjg7xfKeQJfBmWRLXMDOvZn2eH+t+M+6nLapjV+oCPMg 6GzzYgWKE3XFUWqU9/56gYfjzAAOhwpeukVbzZKq8ysNIqSQCADDiDCOUys5ytj2 XjQOMig/nNj8RMheT9MsziOnd6cr6qMAe9ZzOJYTk++aQYEwPBzbHvHXcf20Knap NFmzqi6Bz+aDdh6+DngRb3e3QsR0HWQaHMAQ6S64w42m1149Rj85B3PCmitZRtD4 ETrMR8kktSK/VdPXCY6MkYSvSQrfmbsMii4Qmd6Ny073527zNqee6esu9ih7EcNS /UpLnMWIYs/4W7JvnODhSGIfPaeUjmEpiY9AAZUBZmpatbk7Toy/dyw6/NKl9ANZ Jk8mjFO3H6Fa6mnvUsfQHp+OBWAOaXy1Xx+EDBIQIV7Dn1jy1Eyrex44g/vJYEJm 2FNeLJKXycADqLA5Hq85Yo81r4m0F5z5lUf9IH+lpLSDTcB0q15dm4AWVyX5wep7 b9zKEloBAyqCP8NLXZiUx9+Qrq7EemSogZIN4tkyQgnDJ1n9vc13rxxJ6vic+IPD YyqpN0tAAkj+6WTfjDsPpzJLH6UFtpOTy3rIRoBRHjha8nYkVxUaEIzzWw5cX2vS KC1gaVbYBab9WseaS41ff8EkbLwu36bbqiCNWJRHO9F+525uXyTGIzjdVw102Otr NwHwYU1yxBKjyAD7 =mR54 - -END PGP MESSAGE- - -- Regards, John My Public PGP Key Can Be Found Here http://legacy.sheltonbbs.com/~jmmorse/pgp.html -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGPsdk 2.0.1 Copyright (C) 2000 Networks Associates Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. iQA/AwUBP5MKv2DExQtRQTHTEQKERACfQZazPTAxu5dnkqbegoqurfXbm6kAn1x7 zbN7HVCjfwWS2tkBuTXDBSKc =++FN -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
Hello John, On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] RW thoughts on the matter. In fact I had (now just removed) a filter to RW ignore all PGP titled mails. I removed my filter too, once a few nice people helped me off list. Its neat that you can send an encrypted message and no one can read what it says except the person that you encrypted it to...Not even your Internet provider, etc. Don't suppose you'd be willing to pass on that help would you? I've now downloaded and installed PGP 8.02 and it's very easily and nicely set up some keys for me but I'm a bit scared to put them into practice incase I make a complete cock up of it all! I see that you've got to grips with it so it can't be that difficult - that's not to imply that you are thick, of course, just that it seems more difficult than it actually is ;-) -- Best regards, Richard | Using The Bat! 2.01 SpamPal | Windows 2000 (build 2195), version 5.0 Service Pack 4 | and using the best browser: Opera7 Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi The_Bat! Users, Sunday, October 19, 2003, 5:34:41 PM, you wrote: RW Don't suppose you'd be willing to pass on that help would you? I've RW now downloaded and installed PGP 8.02 and it's very easily and nicely RW set up some keys for me but I'm a bit scared to put them into practice Don't be scared, now that you have your keys created, right click on them and right click on your key manager and choose Add|Photo so we will be able to see what you look like (this is optional) But anyway, you need to upload your public key to a server, do this by clicking on Server|send to (just choose one of the servers, I picked the first one) Once you do that, experiment with signing a message. I have my HOtkeys setup (go to PGP options) so that Ctrl+Shift+E will encrypt the message (doesn't matter what program your working in) and Ctrl+Shift+S will sign the message. You can also sign a message (if you have PGP enabled in the bats properties for your mail account) then you can sign your message from the menu at top, choose Privacy|OpenPGP|(make your choice) If you want to experiment off list, you can send me practice email, or you can even practice sending them to yourself. Remember you will need my Key, if you want to Encrypt something to me, because when you choose encrypt, then a menu will popup that will want you to choose a key to encrypt to. - -- Regards, John My Public PGP Key Can Be Found Here http://legacy.sheltonbbs.com/~jmmorse/pgp.html -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 7.0.4 iQA/AwUBP5McmmDExQtRQTHTEQKClQCdHIXTTST5FtYPM2T4XyMilemRKZ4AoOY6 O5uQHkdfcRtESjUzIpp0/sEw =c9cf -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello John, On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Don't be scared, now that you have your keys created, right click on them and right click on your key manager and choose Add|Photo so we will be able to see what you look like (this is optional) OK, I've done that. But anyway, you need to upload your public key to a server, do this by clicking on Server|send to (just choose one of the servers, I picked the first one) I'm far too eager and have sent to both! Once you do that, experiment with signing a message. I have my HOtkeys setup (go to PGP options) so that Ctrl+Shift+E will encrypt the message (doesn't matter what program your working in) and Ctrl+Shift+S will sign the message. You can also sign a message (if you have PGP enabled in the bats properties for your mail account) And I've signed this one. Just had a look at your PGP key and imported but I suppose I now need your private key. I'm getting there. -- Best regards, Richard | Using The Bat! 2.01 SpamPal | Windows 2000 (build 2195), version 5.0 Service Pack 4 | and using the best browser: Opera7 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP SDK 3.0.2 iQA/AwUBP5Mr/BqZtcDKk7W+EQJiBwCg9jA3QKV9N932VniY8qUoJ4B+u1UAniiZ s+AqngfISzr4yzJH/fLhcZQw =RsYi -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi The_Bat! Users, Sunday, October 19, 2003, 7:33:40 PM, you wrote: RW And I've signed this one. Just had a look at your PGP key and imported RW but I suppose I now need your private key. I'm getting there. No, you don't need my private key, that is only for me... just as your private key is only for you. All you will need is my Public key to send me an encrypted message. - -- Regards, John My Public PGP Key Can Be Found Here http://legacy.sheltonbbs.com/~jmmorse/pgp.html -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGPsdk 2.0.1 Copyright (C) 2000 Networks Associates Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. iQA/AwUBP5M9ZmDExQtRQTHTEQJl/QCg7F+Y4urJGEdsV/mgzv//Pr8ghuMAoKvO mjt9ybnX86+lZT7W7r4Gwllx =7sah -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release (PGP)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi The_Bat! Users, Sunday, October 19, 2003, 8:52:43 PM, you wrote: NS Reading your E-mail I have added my photo to my key. Perhaps you NS would be kind enough to verify, please I couldn't get your key, it said unknown key - -- Regards, John My Public PGP Key Can Be Found Here http://legacy.sheltonbbs.com/~jmmorse/pgp.html -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGPsdk 2.0.1 Copyright (C) 2000 Networks Associates Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. iQA/AwUBP5NXIWDExQtRQTHTEQL89ACgpG6lnbKCIo2zkfgdm8aVV2LGCX4AniUe vQ1iP8qfLLpCXqadOdD+xGCt =3JaQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Thomas Martin, [TM] wrote: Hmmm. Would you download my keys from the URL in my signature and replace the ones you have with those. I don't understand what's happening either. TM Done and now shows good key - never expires. But you still have a TM expired subkey (October 11, 2003) in it. Wow!!! You're very right. My main key no longer has a valid encryption key. I just created one and updated my keys on my personal page (url in my signature) and on the keyservers as well. So please update again and the same for all others who have and use my keys. Thanks for the heads up there Thomas. That encryption key had just expired a few days back. -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release [PGP]
Hi The_Bat! Users, Thursday, October 16, 2003, 1:26:28 AM, you wrote: V Ok, I bite the bait and jump in :) The reason digital signatures are so useful V is that they can really authenticate you in a near categorical manner. To fake a V digital signature is very difficult due to the mathematical properties and trust V mechanisms it is based on. Thanks for helping me to understand this. Anytime I have ever asked about PGP, I have just been insulted or told to go look it up on another website. But if people are going to talk about it so much on this list they should at least be willing to explain it a little, like you have done... I really appreciate you taking the time to do this... I may experiment with PGP once I understand it a little more. -- John Morse Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hi The_Bat! Users, Thursday, October 16, 2003, 7:01:56 AM, you wrote: DRS Depends on your use of e-mail. For private correspondence and sender DRS identity verification PGP is an extremely important and secure DRS medium. Some of us rely on encryption and verification to transmit DRS important data and e-mail. Others simply utilize e-mail as a chat DRS method where you, as the sender, and the receiver not need be DRS concerned with the identity of the sender nor the placement of DRS sensitive content in the body. Obviously you are one of the latter DRS users. Thanks Mr. Raftery! I've tried to read up on it on some of the websites about PGP, but its like a foreign language to me, I just don't understand how it works. Is there a PGP 101 site :) -- John Morse Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hello John, on Thursday, 16. October 2003, at 09:13:50 [GMT -0500] you wrote: I've tried to read up on it on some of the websites about PGP, but its like a foreign language to me, I just don't understand how it works. Is there a PGP 101 site :) I think a good starting page could be the page of Tom McCune. Was the _first_ i read. http://www.mccune.cc/PGP.htm -- Ciao Thomas Mailer: TheBat! 2.01 OS: Windows XP Service Pack 1 PGP:PGP 8.0 | Key: 0xABBB7287 HP: http://www.thebatworld.de Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hi John, on Thu, 16 Oct 2003 09:13:50 -0500GMT (16.10.03, 16:13 +0200GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : JM Is there a PGP 101 site :) Here's another tutorial, particularly in regard of the use of PGP with The Bat!: http://www.pro-privacy.de -- Cheers Peter Lottery: A tax on people who don't understand statistics. Winamp currently playing: Paolo Conte - Alle prese con una verde milon pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release [PGP]
Hello John Thank you for your email dated Thursday, October 16, 2003, 3:09:30 PM, in which you wrote: JM Thanks for helping me to understand this. There's also an excellent Yahoo group for beginners at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PGP-Basics/ You may see some familiar names there. -- Regards William http://www.residues.info and http://www.magiric.com Flying with The Bat! www.ritlabs.com/the_bat Windows 2000 Pro 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release [PGP]
Hi The_Bat! Users, Thursday, October 16, 2003, 10:43:23 AM, you wrote: WM There's also an excellent Yahoo group for beginners at WM http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PGP-Basics/ WM You may see some familiar names there. Just joined it. thanks! -- John Morse Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
John Morse, [JM] wrote: JM Thanks Mr. Raftery! I've tried to read up on it on some of the JM websites about PGP, but its like a foreign language to me, I just JM don't understand how it works. Is there a PGP 101 site :) Ah great. :) I'd be willing to entertain any questions you may wish to send my way via private mail. I'm always happy when these PGP discussions perk the interest of someone not using it. The more people that use it, the more it will become useful and effective. The others have provided useful links. I don't have any to add. The only thing I'd suggest is installing one of them and actually trying it. Getting it to work is a big and important step, even if you don't know that much about how it really works. My knowledge of PGP continued to grow long after I was actually using it. My knowledge seems to have stagnated these days. I'm just not that interested in the technical side of it. :) -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release - scroll keys
This is pretty weird. Scroll-keys (e.g. PageUp, PageDown) no longer work in the Message Preview pane for the main window or in a View Folder window and cannot place a visual cursor in the pane. This is the case for at least some, but not all messages. For instance, the digests from [EMAIL PROTECTED] are OK. Edit windows (as opposed to View windows) are OK as well. I haven't determined a further pattern yet. Have I overlooked something in 2.01? -- Best regards, Lawrence Johnsonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release - scroll keys
Hallo Lawrence, On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 03:14:43 -0500GMT (15-10-03, 10:14 +0200, where I live), you wrote: LJ Scroll-keys (e.g. PageUp, PageDown) no longer work in the LJ Message Preview pane for the main window or in a View Folder LJ window and cannot place a visual cursor in the pane. LJ This is the case for at least some, but not all messages. What kind of messages show this behaviour? HTML/Text Text only HTML only What are your settings for viewing HTML (Options - Preferences - Viewer/Editor) What OS What keyboard language, etc -- Groetjes, Roelof Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Vishal, [V] wrote: V Do we need to install some other version of PGP for this? Because as V usual, your and Allie's signatures don't validate. Invalid signature V - unknown signature format. Which PGP version are you using? If it's the integrated PGP version, then it will not be able to validate our signatures since it's based on PGP v2.x which doesn't support DH/DSS key types. I'd recommend using either GnuPG or PGP v7 or later. There are also the ckt versions of PGP 6.5.8 that you could also use. -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release - scroll keys
Lawrence Johnson, [LJ] wrote: LJ Scroll-keys (e.g. PageUp, PageDown) no longer work in the LJ Message Preview pane for the main window or in a View Folder window LJ and cannot place a visual cursor in the pane. I've noted this in the last two beta's before this official release. I still confirm it here. The Alt-up/down scrolling still works. Same for spacebar. However, after putting the viewer window in focus, the the up/down and pageup/down keys no longer scroll. This occurs with all my messages since noting the problem. The majority are plain text. Others are HTML. I use the Rich text viewer mainly. Upon switching to the plain text viewer, the problem doesn't exist. -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html TB! v2.01 on WinXP Pro SP1 _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release - scroll keys
Hallo Allie, On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 05:50:21 -0500GMT (15-10-03, 12:50 +0200, where I live), you wrote: AM The Alt-up/down scrolling still works. Same for spacebar. However, after AM putting the viewer window in focus, the the up/down and pageup/down keys AM no longer scroll. This occurs with all my messages since noting the AM problem. The majority are plain text. Others are HTML. I use the Rich AM text viewer mainly. Upon switching to the plain text viewer, the problem AM doesn't exist. Reading your message and Lawrence's private reply to me, explains why I didn't notice it. As I prefer to read my messages as plain text and no RTV. I can reproduce it. Since you said you noticed it in the last betas, I presume Ritlabs already is in the know... -- Groetjes, Roelof Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re:2.01.00 Release
Hi Allie, on Tue, 14 Oct 2003, at 21:08:33 local time (GMT -0500), you wrote: JM Okay...what's the yellow checkmark in the envelope AM It indicates that the message was digitally signed, in this case, using AM PGP. Mmm, this is funny ; i noticed my (GPG signed) post yesterday did not have the checkmark, so i did some test-replies with various settings to see why not. On one reply the yellow checkmark _did_ show up in the Outbox, but now i can not reproduce it ... :-( -- Rob using The Bat! 2.01 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 ~ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hi Rob, @15-Oct-2003, 20:16 +0200 (19:16 UK time) Rob [R] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Allie: AM It indicates that the message was digitally signed, in this AM case, using PGP. R Mmm, this is funny ; i noticed my (GPG signed) post yesterday did R not have the checkmark, so i did some test-replies with various R settings to see why not. On one reply the yellow checkmark _did_ R show up in the Outbox, but now i can not reproduce it ... :-( MIME is the key. A PGP/MIME signature (like this message has and like your previous message had) or an S/MIME signature will show a check mark in the message list. A non-MIME signed message or an unsigned message will not have a check mark. The reason? Well, the message list is displaying information gleaned from the message header. A MIME signature has an impact on the message headers. TB indicates the presence of the MIME signarture with a check mark. -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v2.01 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re:2.01.00 Release
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Marck, on Wed, 15 Oct 2003, at 21:50:35 local time (GMT +0100), you wrote: MDP MIME is the key. A PGP/MIME signature (like this message has and MDP like your previous message had) or an S/MIME signature will show a MDP check mark in the message list. A non-MIME signed message or an MDP unsigned message will not have a check mark. i found out what the difference is between my 2 messages ; the one you just replied to has a checkmark and the one in the Version 2.01 is out thread are both signed but only the previous one shows a checkmark ... What i did in the first one was Privacy - OpenPGP - Sign entire text, while for the one you replied to, i used Privay - Sign when completed ... shouldn't make a difference as dar as MIME is concerned ?? I'll use the first option again for this one, so despite being signed it should not have a checkmark. - -- Rob using The Bat! 2.01 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 ~ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (MingW32) Comment: signed, sealed, delivered ... iD8DBQE/jbp8nbXP+5Mcmp8RAms1AJ91qL5ZCPiKYQheJuzpZESqAlT9lQCgwNow +M1hjt2R4DGHBIaG7/jWkY4= =oOi9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re:2.01.00 Release
Hi Marck, on Wed, 15 Oct 2003, at 21:50:35 local time (GMT +0100), you wrote: DP MIME is the key. A PGP/MIME signature (like this message has and MDP like your previous message had) or an S/MIME signature will show a MDP check mark in the message list. signed this reply with Privacy - Sign when completed ... -- Rob using The Bat! 2.01 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 ~ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hi Rob, @15-Oct-2003, 23:22 +0200 (22:22 UK time) Rob [R] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Marck: R I'll use the first option again for this one, so despite being R signed it should not have a checkmark. It doesn't have a checkmark because Sign complete text does a real-time *text* signature. Sign when complete will pay additional attention to the PGP/MIME settings (which default to Auto). Text signed messages have no Signed headers and therefore no checkmark. A message signed when complete with PGP/MIME set to On will get a proper PGP/MIME signature and will have a check mark in the message list. A message signed when complete with PGP/MIME set to Off will get a text signature instead of a MIME one and have no check mark. A message signed when complete with PGP/MIME set to Auto will get a text signature instead of a MIME one and have no check mark *sometimes*. The rules for that last one are that PGP/MIME is used (and a checkmark seen in the message list) ... 1) If there are 8 bit characters in the message 2) If any lines end with a space (like the cut mark line) 3) If any lines start with 'from' otherwise, if none of the above conditions are met, the message will be signed with a text signature and will get no checkmark. -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v2.01 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re:2.01.00 Release
G'day Marck, On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, at 00:54:53 [GMT +0100] (09:54 here) you wrote: MDP I have copied this message over from the Canadian TB list - thanks MDP to Thomas Martin for posting it there. ..snip.. MDP [*] PGP key for [EMAIL PROTECTED] is included in the default keyring. The only Ritlabs corporate key I have in my keyring is an expired key. Is this the correct one? Finger print: 55B5 A5D5 741D 058D 27B2 FAC5 F97B 1FD3 Why are there so many expired keys for people at Ritlabs? ..snip.. -- znark The Bat! 2.01 Windows XP - Service Pack 1, Build 2600 POPFile 0.19.1 PGP 6.5.8ckt - Build 08 Proxomitron 4.5 Kerio Personal Firewall 2.1.5 Hotmail Popper 2.0.3 Windows would look better with curtains. Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Peter Kerekes, [PK] wrote: AM It indicates that the message was digitally signed, in this case, AM using PGP. PK How come I don't see any checkmark? Signed messages from me should have a checkmark as shown in the capture. This indicates that my messages are PGP/MIME signed. http://www.ac-martin.com/pics/check.png If you aren't seeing this, then I'm not sure why. PK BTW I don't use any PGP, is this why? I don't know. PK I use MicroEd Editor. For some time now (including Allie's and PK Mark's) Emails shows a TAB, and an attachment called *Part.txt* PK which is probably created by PGP. Yes. When we PGP/MIME sign messages as we do, any text appended by the list server will be appended as an attachment. If it's added as part of the message body, it would break the PGP/MIME signature. PK I did not remember having that with older versions of BAT PK (1.5-1.6x), That's right. Those versions don't support PGP/MIME. What you should see are two attachments. One for the list footer and the other for the PGP/MIME signature. PK those had at the end of the E-mailthe same text, sometimes stripped PK by the special sig-delimiter other times not. This was when we used in-line signatures which are different from PGP/MIME. PGP/MIME avoids including the digital signature in the message body. This makes it cleaner and more presentable. PGP/MIME also allows you to sign/encrypt attachments that you may wish to send with the text. The message and attachment are therefore signed as a single package. -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Vishal, [V] wrote: V I use PGP 7 on my other machines. Do you have my public key? I don't see why my signatures shouldn't verify for you. They verify ok here, i.e., the copies of messages sent back to me from the list server. -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hi Rob, @15-Oct-2003, 23:25 +0200 (22:25 UK time) Rob [R] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Marck: MDP like your previous message had) or an S/MIME signature will show a MDP check mark in the message list. R signed this reply with Privacy - Sign when completed ... That doesn't have any bearing on what happens - see my previous response for explanation. -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v2.01 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hello Allie, on Wednesday, 15. October 2003, at 18:39:35 [GMT -0500] you wrote: V I use PGP 7 on my other machines. Do you have my public key? I don't see why my signatures shouldn't verify for you. They verify ok here, i.e., the copies of messages sent back to me from the list server. My PGP Log shows that you use a expired Key -:) Is that right? -- Ciao Thomas Mailer: TheBat! 2.01 OS: Windows XP Service Pack 1 PGP:PGP 8.0 | Key: 0xABBB7287 HP: http://www.thebatworld.de Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hi The_Bat! Users, Wednesday, October 15, 2003, 7:12:25 PM, you wrote: V I use PGP 7 on my other machines. Do you have my public key? I don't see why my signatures shouldn't verify for you. They verify ok here, i.e., the copies of messages sent back to me from the list server. TM My PGP Log shows that you use a expired Key -:) Is that right? PGP is an absolute waste of time (to me) so if possible when these discussions turn to PGP issues, is there anyway that we could get everyone to put PGP in the subject line? That way I can filter with PGP in the subject and The Bat in the Kludges, to the trash. -- John Morse Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Thomas Martin, [TM] wrote: TM My PGP Log shows that you use a expired Key -:) Is that right? If you're referring to the signed message you responded to, then no, that isn't right. It was signed using my DH/DSS key id: 0x2B0717E2 . It's set to never expire. -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hello Allie, on Wednesday, 15. October 2003, at 19:40:43 [GMT -0500] you wrote: TM My PGP Log shows that you use a expired Key -:) Is that right? If you're referring to the signed message you responded to, then no, that isn't right. It was signed using my DH/DSS key id: 0x2B0717E2 . It's set to never expire. Yes to that i am referring. You have a subkey which expired on October,11. Also an other subkey which expires never added to your key on October 12. But why my log file, and also in the Keylist, shows that your Key is expired in general? Strange -- Ciao Thomas Mailer: TheBat! 2.01 OS: Windows XP Service Pack 1 PGP:PGP 8.0 | Key: 0xABBB7287 HP: http://www.thebatworld.de Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Is PGP worthwile? (was: Re: 2.01.00 Release)
John Morse, [JM] wrote: JM PGP is an absolute waste of time (to me) :) Normally, without really caring about a stranger's opinion, I'd just let it pass. However, I find PGP to be a very important tool to be capable of using, and wonder why is it you'd find it a waste of time. TB! has always provided good support for PGP in the interest of secure e-mailing as a primary part of its development path. For professional and even private e-mailing, I strongly agree with and endorse this, so discussing this would certainly be on-topic, IMO. How do you prove to others that e-mail is in fact from you or that e-mail you sent hasn't been altered after you signed it? How do you go about private or sensitive correspondence with others through e-mail. You may use alternative means when doing that sort of correspondence since your current approach to e-mail isn't secure. However, using PGP could make these things possible with very good security. A common reason is that you'd be the only one among your correspondents using it. This was and is no longer the case for me since speaking with some of those I exchange sensitive information by e-mail with. For me, it's been one of those tools that I didn't think I'd need (I really started using it about a year after I started using TB! and I remember reluctantly doing so at that) and now that I use it, I can't do without it. :) JM so if possible when these discussions turn to PGP issues, is there JM anyway that we could get everyone to put PGP in the subject line? JM That way I can filter with PGP in the subject and The Bat in the JM Kludges, to the trash. Good one, so I'll start since we failed to appropriately change the subject when the focus changed to PGP issues. -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Thomas Martin, [TM] wrote: TM Yes to that i am referring. You have a subkey which expired on TM October,11. Also an other subkey which expires never added to your TM key on October 12. But why my log file, and also in the Keylist, TM shows that your Key is expired in general? Strange Hmmm. Would you download my keys from the URL in my signature and replace the ones you have with those. I don't understand what's happening either. Also, I did add another subkey to that key but I've since deleted it. The problem with the keyservers is that when you update a key, it's done only in an additive way. So if you update your key by removing a UID or subkey etc., the update process will not lead to them being removed from the key on the server. -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hello John, on Wednesday, 15. October 2003, at 19:40:05 [GMT -0500] you wrote: PGP is an absolute waste of time (to me) . This is the most ignorant post i have read in the last years anywhere. Sorry... not worth to discuss with you. -- Ciao Thomas Mailer: TheBat! 2.01 OS: Windows XP Service Pack 1 PGP:PGP 8.0 | Key: 0xABBB7287 HP: http://www.thebatworld.de Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hello Allie, on Wednesday, 15. October 2003, at 20:28:09 [GMT -0500] you wrote: TM Yes to that i am referring. You have a subkey which expired on TM October,11. Also an other subkey which expires never added to your TM key on October 12. But why my log file, and also in the Keylist, TM shows that your Key is expired in general? Strange Hmmm. Would you download my keys from the URL in my signature and replace the ones you have with those. I don't understand what's happening either. Done and now shows good key - never expires. But you still have a expired subkey (October 11, 2003) in it. -- Ciao Thomas Mailer: TheBat! 2.01 OS: Windows XP Service Pack 1 PGP:PGP 8.0 | Key: 0xABBB7287 HP: http://www.thebatworld.de Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Is PGP worthwile? (was: Re: 2.01.00 Release)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Allie, Thursday, October 16, 2003, 6:17:34 AM, you wrote: AM John Morse, [JM] wrote: JM PGP is an absolute waste of time (to me) AM TB! has always provided good support for PGP in the interest of AM secure e-mailing as a primary part of its development path. For AM professional and even private e-mailing, I strongly agree with and AM endorse this, so discussing this would certainly be on-topic, IMO. TB!'s support for PGP is in fact one of the reasons I switched to it (from Eudora). AM How do you prove to others that e-mail is in fact from you or that AM e-mail you sent hasn't been altered after you signed it? I currently work overseas (Former Soviet Union),where the hackers and virus writers are legion (and quite proficient). I started to use PGP because of several incidents when people received e-mail purportedly from me. Explaining that I was not in the country, and therefore had no e-mail access at the time, did no good. I therefore started using PGP so that people could verify whether I'd in fact sent the message in question. Not many people used PGP, meaning they could not verify my signature, but at least it was there. At the time, I had frequent problems getting valid signatures with Eudora. As a result, I started looking around and found TB!. While I switched initially because I wanted (and needed) better PGP support, I've since found that it's also a much better program overall. - -- Richard H. Stoddard PGP Request: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt Comment: KeyID: 0x899FEAAB Comment: Fingerprint: 0F58 92FF 24DC B847 9A85 6ED4 9EAF FD46 899F EAAB iQA/AwUBP42x7J6v/UaJn+qrEQJRhQCg8aZoIGhaL9vpSLxa9PwGXwfcGP0AoKfY +mjER/nKcsvguhH9ej04vtN/ =R/fK -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hi The_Bat! Users, Wednesday, October 15, 2003, 8:16:40 PM, you wrote: If you're referring to the signed message you responded to, then no, that isn't right. It was signed using my DH/DSS key id: 0x2B0717E2 . It's set to never expire. TM Yes to that i am referring. You have a subkey which expired on October,11. TM Also an other subkey which expires never added to your key on October 12. TM But why my log file, and also in the Keylist, shows that your Key is expired TM in general? Strange Could you alter the subject so that it describes this conversation better? Thanks (You might PGP or Encryption in the subject line) -- John Morse Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hi The_Bat! Users, Wednesday, October 15, 2003, 8:45:46 PM, you wrote: TM This is the most ignorant post i have read in the last years anywhere. TM Sorry... not worth to discuss with you. Can you explain to me why you need it?? Ooops, maybe this isn't really me, I didn't attach a key signature to it... woooh, oh, scary isn't it! Get some help. :) Sorry if I scared you, but this really is from me, here is my phone number too If you would like to verify that I sent this message. 573-222-2483 -- John Morse Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Tuesday, October 14, 2003, 6:54:53 PM, you wrote: [] Okay...what's the yellow checkmark in the envelope (in the Message List window) mean?? It's popped up on your last two messages, Marck. -- Best regards, Jack Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Jack Morrison, [JM] wrote: JM Okay...what's the yellow checkmark in the envelope (in the Message JM List window) mean?? JM It's popped up on your last two messages, Marck. It indicates that the message was digitally signed, in this case, using PGP. -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator PGPKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html _ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hi Jack, @14-Oct-2003, 20:45 -0500 (15-Oct 02:45 UK time) Jack Morrison [JM] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Marck: JM Tuesday, October 14, 2003, 6:54:53 PM, you wrote: [] JM Okay...what's the yellow checkmark in the envelope (in the JM Message List window) mean?? JM It's popped up on your last two messages, Marck. It means that my messages are PGP/MIME signed and that (if you use PGP or GnuPG) you can verify 1) that they come from me and 2) that they are unchanged. -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v2.01 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hello Jack, on Tuesday, 14. October 2003, at 22:13:35 [GMT -0500] you wrote: It means that my messages are PGP/MIME signed and that (if you use PGP or GnuPG) you can verify 1) that they come from me and 2) that they are unchanged. Thanks, Marck (and Allie)! I assume it's new in v2.01? I think this feature is implemented since TB! 1.62 Beta 10 or Final 2.0. I am not sure. -- Ciao Thomas Mailer: TheBat! 2.01 OS: Windows XP Service Pack 1 PGP:PGP 8.0 | Key: 0xABBB7287 HP: http://www.thebatworld.de Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: 2.01.00 Release
Hi Jack, @14-Oct-2003, 22:13 -0500 (15-Oct 04:13 UK time) Jack Morrison [JM] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Marck: It means that my messages are PGP/MIME signed and that (if you use PGP or GnuPG) you can verify 1) that they come from me and 2) that they are unchanged. JM Thanks, Marck (and Allie)! I assume it's new in v2.01? Digital signing has been a long time supported feature in TB. TB 2 adds the following: 1) The flagging of MIME signed messages in the message list. V1 would flag S/MIME signed messages. V2 now knows about PGP/MIME too. 2) Better integrated support with a (?) icon in the message preview (and folder) header for signature checking. 3) PGP/MIME support 4) PGP v7 and v8 support and dispensing with the need to use plug-ins for the job. -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v2.01 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.01 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
