This was EXACTLY my point as to why GPG/PGP for signing email is
currently flawed the way it works now.
Case in point: This discussion originated as a discussion
about using digital signatures to counter spam. Since
digital signatures, on today's Internet, are relatively
uncommon, they
On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, at 8:10am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[commentary about non-repudiation not being possible on the Internet]
This was EXACTLY my point as to why GPG/PGP for signing email is currently
flawed the way it works now.
No, it is not flawed, either, anymore than a wrench is flawed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Derek,
On your key I get
Signature made Mon 30 Dec 2002 01:19:00 PM EST using DSA key ID DFBEAD02
Good signature from Derek D. Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted
No, [GPG] is not flawed, either, anymore than a wrench
is flawed because it makes a lousy screwdriver.
Right. Funny - this all reminds me of the time when
my little sister and I were presented with a pair
of walkie-talkies. Our parents were initially pleased
to see how much fun we had
