-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello TBUDL!
I just want to know if I'm to stupid to find it: Is there an option
to make your POP3 connection a secure SSL one? My mail provider
will support this in a few days and I'd like to use it, so if it is
not an option with TB!,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday, June 04, 2000, 8:12:27 AM, Dierk Haasis wrote:
DH I just want to know if I'm to stupid to find it: Is there an option
DH to make your POP3 connection a secure SSL one? My mail provider
DH will support this in a few days and I'd like
Servus Jast,
Am 04.06.2000 so gegen 20:39 meintest Du:
Nope. With APOP your password is encrypted when you log on. SSL encrypts
the actual data during transfer. Bat doesn't support this.
Now sure, GMX cannot provide a shell for every of it's customers, but
if you need encrypted
Hallo Dierk,
Sunday, June 04, 2000, 5:12:27 PM, you wrote:
DH I just want to know if I'm to stupid to find it: Is there an option
DH to make your POP3 connection a secure SSL one? My mail provider
DH will support this in a few days and I'd like to use it, so if it is
DH not an option
On Sun, 4 Jun 2000 11:28:54 -0700, Nick Andriash wrote:
NA That is not to be confused however, with my wish for a better
NA alternative to MS Windows... it's just that Linux isn't it. :o)
I like that. I feel exactly the same way about Linux. It's a
poor desktop solution at this time.
JMP Now sure, GMX cannot provide a shell for every of it's customers, but
JMP if you need encrypted transmission of your eMails from your POP3 box
JMP to your client, you'd also consider a SSH tunnel. You've got the
JMP choice between both, and personally I prefer SSH with port forwarding
JMP
NA That is not to be confused however, with my wish for a better
NA alternative to MS Windows... it's just that Linux isn't it. :o)
AM I like that. I feel exactly the same way about Linux. It's a
AM poor desktop solution at this time.
Yup there's the catch-22, eh? There is no
On Sun, 4 Jun 2000 18:42:13 -0700, Tom Plunket wrote:
NA That is not to be confused however, with my wish for a better
NA alternative to MS Windows... it's just that Linux isn't it. :o)
AM I like that. I feel exactly the same way about Linux. It's a
AM poor desktop solution at this
Hi Allie,
On Sunday, June 04, 2000, 8:51:21 PM, you wrote in part about "Linux
on the desktop":
A Exactly! :-/ Even if TB! were ported I'd still not budge
A from Win2k. Too many other apps that I enjoy using which I will not
A find for Linux.
I would have to disagree with you here. I
Hi TBUDL,
I can't figure this out.
In my company, the email addresses are [EMAIL PROTECTED] The
"real name" is always "Our Company Inc", which means that the
quotestyle "initials" results in an abbreviation that is not commonly
used. Also, I want to show who the actual sender of the original
Hello Nick Andriash,
On Sun, 4 Jun 2000 11:28:54 -0700 GMT your local time,
which was Monday, June 05, 2000, 1:28:54 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Nick Andriash wrote:
On Sunday, June 04, 2000, 8:12:27 AM, Dierk Haasis wrote:
DH I just want to know if I'm to stupid to find it: Is there an
Hi,
I've noticed that when encrypted messages which contain
attachments are decrypted. The decrypted message that is created doesn't
contain the attachments. I'd think that it should contain the
attachments.
--
Allie Martin[ TB! v1.44 | Win2k Pro ]
PGP Key: mailto:[EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday, June 04, 2000, 8:52:39 PM, Allie Martin wrote:
AM I've noticed that when encrypted messages which contain
AM attachments are decrypted. The decrypted message that is created doesn't
AM contain the attachments. I'd think that it
On Sun, 4 Jun 2000 21:32:35 -0700, Nick Andriash wrote:
NA Allie, you are seeing that behaviour because PGP will not encrypt an
NA attachment to an E-Mail. You will have to encrypt the attachment
NA separately, outside of TB!, and you will have to decrypt it
NA separately as well.
So
14 matches
Mail list logo
