L>>>>>> I recently had to supply my accountant with my banking information
via email.
JSL>>>>>> Fortunately the account in question rarely has more that $2000 in it
so even if
JSL>>>>>> the message were intercepted, I wouldn't lose very much. T
Hello Paul,
On Sun, 10 Sep 2017 17:33:03 +1000 GMT (10-Sep-17, 14:33 +0700 GMT),
Paul Berger wrote:
TF>> Just my two cents.
> Thanks, Jack. It is all very helpful.
My name is Thomas, but that's OK. ;-)
--
Cheers,
Thomas.
Message reply created with The Bat! 7.4.16.33 (ALPHA)
under Windows
SL>>>>>>> So I wondered, is it possible to send an encrypted email to someone
who has no
JSL>>>>>>> encryption in use on his email client? If so, how?
PB>>>>>> I use 7-zip to create a self-extracting zip file wilth password and
PB>>>>&
ore that $2000 in it
so even if
JSL>>>>>> the message were intercepted, I wouldn't lose very much. The account
has no
JSL>>>>>> overdraft protection.
JSL>>>>>> So I wondered, is it possible to send an encrypted email to someone
who has no
JSL>&
>>>>> Fortunately the account in question rarely has more that $2000 in it
so even if
JSL>>>>> the message were intercepted, I wouldn't lose very much. The account
has no
JSL>>>>> overdraft protection.
JSL>>>>> So I wondered, is it possi
e were intercepted, I wouldn't lose very much. The account
has no
JSL>>>> overdraft protection.
JSL>>>> So I wondered, is it possible to send an encrypted email to someone who
has no
JSL>>>> encryption in use on his email client? If so, how?
PB>>>
ion.
JSL>>> So I wondered, is it possible to send an encrypted email to someone who
has no
JSL>>> encryption in use on his email client? If so, how?
PB>> I use 7-zip to create a self-extracting zip file wilth password and
PB>> then email it.
JSL> But then do
t in question rarely has more that $2000 in it so
even if
JSL>> the message were intercepted, I wouldn't lose very much. The account has
no
JSL>> overdraft protection.
JSL>> So I wondered, is it possible to send an encrypted email to someone who
has no
JSL>> encryption in
message were intercepted, I wouldn't lose very much. The account has no
JSL> overdraft protection.
JSL> So I wondered, is it possible to send an encrypted email to someone who
has no
JSL> encryption in use on his email client? If so, how?
I use 7-zip to create a self-extracting zi
, is it possible to send an encrypted email to someone who has no
encryption in use on his email client? If so, how?
--
TIA,
Jack LaRosa
Using TB! 6.0.12
OS: Win 10 v6 Build: 9200
Current version is 7.1 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http
Hi
Are these issues with Draft messages and GnuPG encryption that exist in
my TB! Version 4.0.38 still present in the latest release? Or have
Ritlabs fixed them?
1. Messages configured to be encrypted on completion are not
encrypted when saved/autosaved as drafts.
2. Messages
Hello Robert,
On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 13:33:20 -0400 GMT (10-Sep-13, 00:33 +0700 GMT),
Robert D. wrote:
It must be clear by now the that US National Security Agency--as well
as the comparable security agencies in every other civilized country
in the world--can break all encryption codes and most
Hi MFPA,
thanks for the info.
As an alternative to OpenPGP, another email encryption method The Bat!
can handle is called S/MIME. S/MIME
I've found the Comodo site to get a free s/mime certificate.
But I don't understand configuring it in TB in the S/Mime TLS
preferences window
configuring it in
TB in the S/Mime TLS preferences window.
Play around with the various settings and see what happens; there are
not all that many options. Some will be more secure than others but,
for the time being, anything is probably better than no encryption.
Just remember to keep a tick
Why is everyone so concerned about encrypting their email?
It must be clear by now the that US National Security Agency--as well
as the comparable security agencies in every other civilized country
in the world--can break all encryption codes and most likely were
involved in setting up
Hello Mike,
Monday, September 9, 2013, 10:57:59 AM, you wrote:
It must be clear by now the that US National Security Agency--as well
as the comparable security agencies in every other civilized country
in the world--can break all encryption codes and most likely were
involved in setting up
Hello Mike,
Monday, September 9, 2013, 10:57:59 AM, you wrote:
It must be clear by now the that US National Security Agency--as well
as the comparable security agencies in every other civilized country
in the world--can break all encryption codes and most likely were
involved in setting
What i sent was meant as humor, a joke. I was not serious.
I got it - they keep my passwords right next to my colonoscopy :D
--
Rick
No one can earn a million dollars honestly.
- William Jennings Bryan
v5.4.8 on Windows 6.2 Build 9200
Using all POP accounts
I download all images
was altered in transit. You can sign or encrypt or
both.)
As an alternative to OpenPGP, another email encryption method The Bat!
can handle is called S/MIME. S/MIME probably has a less-steep learning
curve than OpenPGP, and there are probably more people using
S/MIME-capable email applications
Hi Paul,
thanks for the reply.
(Forget about GnuGPG)
I didn't find out how to get GNP-pgp work in The Bat.
TB does see the program, but not a Key Manager and
I wasn't able to create keys.
It seems the typical Linux handling I've experienced also with other
programs... too much related
Hi
On Saturday 7 September 2013 at 10:55:53 AM, in
mid:1917084846.20130907115...@boudicca.de, Gunivortus Goos wrote:
I didn't find out how to get GNP-pgp work in The Bat.
TB does see the program, but not a Key Manager and I
wasn't able to create keys.
When you say GNP-pgp do you mean GnuPG
Hi,
is there a kind of encryption which don't need at first reading a long
documentation?
I've installed GNU-pgp but simply don't know how to go further.
I've skimmed the documentation, but didn't get a clue.
Isn't there a software which automatically encrypts mails and the
reciever can read
Hello TBUDL@thebat.,
Saturday, September 7, 2013, 1:07:20 AM, you wrote:
GG Hi,
GG is there a kind of encryption which don't need at first reading a long
GG documentation?
GG I've installed GNU-pgp but simply don't know how to go further.
GG I've skimmed the documentation, but didn't get a clue
Hello all,
Friday, June 19, 2009, Jean Lai Kan wrote:
Does the encryption feature of the Bat 4 Pro allows us to password
individual messages in the In-box, Out-box etc?
no, one masterpassword is used for all accounts and folders, address books
and configuration files.
--
Bye
Marek Mikus
Hello Marek,
Friday, June 19, 2009, 10:56:08 AM, you wrote:
Hello all,
Friday, June 19, 2009, Jean Lai Kan wrote:
Does the encryption feature of the Bat 4 Pro allows us to password
individual messages in the In-box, Out-box etc?
no, one masterpassword is used for all accounts and folders
Hello all,
Friday, June 19, 2009, Jean Lai Kan wrote:
Setting an access password for each account is already possible in the
Bat Home.
in non-encrypted msgbase, You can set access password for every account,
but there is no encryption of files, those are in plain or binary mode.
The Bat's
Hello Marek,
In other words, the Batpro is more secure.
Thanks,
Jean
Setting an access password for each account is already possible in the
Bat Home.
in non-encrypted msgbase, You can set access password for every account,
but there is no encryption of files, those are in plain or binary
Hi All,
Does the encryption feature of the Bat 4 Pro allows us to password individual
messages
in the In-box, Out-box etc?
Thanks
John
Current version is 4.2.6 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
worrying about nothing?
I would also worry about sending Credit Card Info in Plain Text ;-)
As you were already told, a fax could be an alternative.
If you both (sender/recipient) have Windows, you might try
Free Portable Encryption/Decryption Software - PicoCrypt
(http://www.picofactory.com/download
On Friday, September 19, 2008, 16:50:43, Jens Franik wrote:
Licence: Shareware
You should always be wary of security programs that don't use open
encryption standards (this doesn't just mean that the program uses eg.
AES algorithm for encryption, but that you can use another open-source
program
am Freitag, 19. September 2008 um 18:43 schrieb Jernej Simončič:
On Friday, September 19, 2008, 16:50:43, Jens Franik wrote:
Licence: Shareware
You should always be wary of security programs that don't use open
encryption standards
You are right!
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Jens Franik
Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 4:15:40 PM, you wrote:
Hi
On Wednesday 17 September 2008 at 8:13:23 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Dan Lester wrote:
When they write the check they cross out the phone number on it
Phone number? On a cheque?
Most US banks put it on by default. In the past,
Hi
On Thursday 18 September 2008 at 1:46:19 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Dan Lester wrote:
Phone number? On a cheque?
Most US banks put it on by default.
Fair enough. We don't get that in the UK. My phone number is private
and not the bank's or the payee's business unless I decide
My last msg in this thread, comments below as required.
Thursday, September 18, 2008, 7:36:43 AM, you wrote:
Most US banks put it on by default.
Fair enough. We don't get that in the UK. My phone number is private
and not the bank's or the payee's business unless I decide otherwise.
Of
Hello Jernej,
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 22:19:08 +0200 GMT (18/09/2008, 03:19 +0700 GMT),
Jernej Simončič wrote:
True. But the eavesdropper needs to have physical access to the
appropriate cable at least once, while email can be hacked remotely.
JS Which is much easier to get than you imagine -
On Thursday, September 18, 2008, 12:37:05 PM, you wrote:
Yes, anything is possible for a dedicated criminal or legal agency. My
point was the physical access, which means somebody has to be there.
With hacking on the internet, the criminal can be anywhere in the
world.
Sure, but is it worth
Hello Gene,
On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 16:31:07 -0400 GMT (19/09/2008, 03:31 +0700 GMT),
Gene Brown wrote:
Yes, anything is possible for a dedicated criminal or legal agency. My
point was the physical access, which means somebody has to be there.
With hacking on the internet, the criminal can be
these things, and I'm grateful
for that. I like to think that I generally understand the risks and
that I'm reasonably prudent in how I exchange information. I'm glad
there are secure transmission protocols, encryption mechanisms,
trusted sites and all kinds of other things in place so I don't have
to worry
Monday, September 15, 2008, 6:53:21 PM, you wrote:
Is the internet really any riskier than how I use the card every
day?
Actually the internet is much safer. As you point out, you give the
card to all sorts of people. And then there are the people you give
it to on the phone...and on and on.
On Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 17:05:59, Dan Lester wrote:
As a side note, but an important ond, DO NOT PUT YOUR MAIL IN A BOX IN
FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE for the letter carrier to pick up. Your mail can
be taken by a crook and your identity and/or money stolen.
You mean your own postbox or
uses is pretty effective as
an encryption measure even though it's a published standard. A
casual snooper isn't likely to have the necessary tools...
JS Much more likely to have them than anything that would let him
JS intercept IP traffic, be it through DSL or cable (not to mention
JS that even
Hello MFPA,
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 19:41:51 +0100 GMT (17/09/2008, 01:41 +0700 GMT),
MFPA wrote:
Is the internet really any riskier than how I use the card every
day?
M Unlikely to be riskier than allowing people to wander off with it.
M Several years since I saw that - these days they usually
Hi
On Wednesday 17 September 2008 at 5:22:25 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Thomas Fernandez
wrote:
No such EPOS terminals exist over here. The credit card still
disappears with the waiter for a couple of minutes.
Even in the old days of the machine you put the card on, placed a
form over the
Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 9:32:52 AM, you wrote:
As a side note, but an important ond, DO NOT PUT YOUR MAIL IN A BOX IN
FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE for the letter carrier to pick up. Your mail can
be taken by a crook and your identity and/or money stolen.
You mean your own postbox or ...?
On Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 18:15:58, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
True. But the eavesdropper needs to have physical access to the
appropriate cable at least once, while email can be hacked remotely.
Which is much easier to get than you imagine - most buildings have the
phone exchange
On Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 21:13:23, Dan Lester wrote:
Three years. My wife handles the money, and she now pays almost
everything electronically, except for a couple that won't handle that.
Those get dropped at the post office.
Interesting. Checks vanished practically overnight here
Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 2:30:02 PM, you wrote:
On Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 21:13:23, Dan Lester wrote:
Three years. My wife handles the money, and she now pays almost
everything electronically, except for a couple that won't handle that.
Those get dropped at the post office.
Hi
On Wednesday 17 September 2008 at 10:25:14 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Ian A. White wrote:
The reason no one ever blames a phishing scam for the loss of their
secure data is because banks and other financial institutions will not
cover you if you volunteer the information.
And just
Hi
On Wednesday 17 September 2008 at 8:13:23 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Dan Lester wrote:
When they write the check they cross out the phone number on it
Phone number? On a cheque?
--
Best regards,
MFPA
Don't talk unless you can improve on the silence
Using
Hi
On Wednesday 17 September 2008 at 9:30:02 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Jernej Simoncic wrote:
Interesting. Checks vanished practically overnight here when banks
stopped giving guarantee on them about 15 years ago, and everything
moved to electronic transactions.
Lots of shops etc here
of software available for free
for that.
There is Steganos LockNote (free) which fits this role perfectly. Although
you'll have to rar or zip the bare exe file as it may not get delivered.
PGP / GnuPG, but that is dependent on the recipient already being familiar
with this form of encryption.
Anyhow
worrying about nothing?
Some people, myself included, think that the anonymity offered by the
sheer scale of the Internet outweighs the risk of identifying your
message as interesting by including an easy to spot encryption
header or similar. Some people allege that governments only filter
encrypted
On Monday, September 15, 2008, 22:23:31, Jack S. LaRosa wrote:
I need to send credit card info to a vendor in payment for a part yet
to be shipped. Is there an easy way to encrypt the info so it can't be
read if it's intercepted in transit and yet *can* be read by the
recipient? Or am I
encrypted.
I was referring to POTS (plain old telephone service), not IP
telephony (which is about as hard to tap into as other internet
communications; note that Skype's encryption isn't to be trusted).
--
Jernej Simončič http://eternallybored.org/
The grass is brown on both sides of the fence
Hi Jernej Simončič,
Note that listening in on phone conversations (and fax communications)
is much easier than intercepting even unencrypted communication over
the internet.
Except for Skype's IP-phonecalls, I experienced, they're obviously encrypted.
And in a strange turn of
think the average vendor will
go through the procedures of a one-time encryption. If they don't have
a secure website and thus aren't security-conscious, submit your CC
details by phone and worry about how they store the information.
I'm now off to book a rental car for my upcoming trip to Europe
Hello Privateofcourse,
Tuesday, September 16, 2008, 5:21:19 AM, you wrote:
P Hello Jack,
P This is what you said on Mon, 15 Sep 2008 15:23:31 -0500 your time:
Is there an easy way to encrypt the info so it can't be read if it's
intercepted in transit and yet *can* be read by the recipient?
encryption
ND header or similar. Some people allege that governments only filter
ND encrypted traffic, on the assumption that that's how terrorists are
ND communicating. On that subject, I don't think that the government
ND needs to snoop my e-mail to get my CC details, or anything else for
ND
Hello Gene,
Monday, September 15, 2008, 7:53:21 PM, you wrote:
GB On Monday, September 15, 2008, 4:23:31 PM, you wrote:
Or am I worrying about nothing?
GB Maybe I've naive, but I've never had a problem with doing this. If
GB you send your credit card number to the vendor, what happens to it
Hello, Jack--
On Tuesday, September 16, 2008, 1:37:33 PM, you wrote:
GB Is the internet really any riskier than how I use the card every
GB day?
It's called Web Paranoia and it's probably completely un-justified.
You're right in everything you say. Ultimately, we decided to just
conduct the
Hi
On Tuesday 16 September 2008 at 12:19:26 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Gunivortus Goos wrote:
And in a strange turn of events, the cat was electrocuted.
Poor cat. What happened?
--
Best regards,
MFPA
Nothing a Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster won't cure!
Hi
On Tuesday 16 September 2008 at 1:53:21 AM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Gene Brown wrote:
On Monday, September 15, 2008, 4:23:31 PM, you wrote:
When I use a credit card in a restaurant, I give it to the waiter
and he disappears for several minutes.
Is the internet really any
.
Although, of course, the other end may use fax software on a PC...
In addition, the image format that fax uses is pretty effective as
an encryption measure even though it's a published standard. A
casual snooper isn't likely to have the necessary tools...
The casual snooper may be snooping
to eavesdrop on phone - you just need to
connect a cable at the appropriate place. Once you do that, it's not
even that hard to intercept faxes.
In
addition, the image format that fax uses is pretty effective as an
encryption measure even though it's a published standard. A casual
snooper isn't likely
Fellow list members,
I need to send credit card info to a vendor in payment for a part yet
to be shipped. Is there an easy way to encrypt the info so it can't be
read if it's intercepted in transit and yet *can* be read by the
recipient? Or am I worrying about nothing?
--
TIA,
Jack LaRosa
as an
encryption measure even though it's a published standard. A casual
snooper isn't likely to have the necessary tools...
--
Jim Kyle
Using The Bat! v3.85.03 on Windows 98 4.10 Build A
with AntiSpamSniper Version 2.7.1.5
Current version
Hi Jack,
On Monday, September 15, 2008 at 4:23:31 PM you wrote:
JSL Fellow list members,
JSL I need to send credit card info to a vendor in payment for a part yet
JSL to be shipped. Is there an easy way to encrypt the info so it can't be
JSL read if it's intercepted in transit and yet *can* be
On Monday, September 15, 2008, 4:23:31 PM, you wrote:
Or am I worrying about nothing?
Maybe I've naive, but I've never had a problem with doing this. If
you send your credit card number to the vendor, what happens to it
after that? How does the vendor secure it?
When I use a credit card in a
Hello Alto!
On Thursday, January 18, 2007, 2:42 PM, you wrote:
BTW, does the current version of TheBat work with PGP Desktop v9?
MB Sorry, I can't help with that. I would bet that the issue is
MB *not* resolved.
Oh, well. To be honest there's not much of a reason for me to switch
from PGP
Guten Morgen,
BTW, does the current version of TheBat work with PGP Desktop v9?
MB Sorry, I can't help with that. I would bet that the issue is *not*
MB resolved.
Oh, well. To be honest there's not much of a reason for me to switch
from PGP v8 to v9 anyway. ;-)
MB If I enter a wish on
Hello all,
Wednesday, January 17, 2007, Alto Speckhardt wrote:
BTW, does the current version of TheBat work with PGP Desktop v9? The
v8 version has no issues, but didn't a file get renamed with v9 so
that TheBat wouldn't recognize it any more? Did that issue get
resolved since?
PGP9 is not
Guten Morgen,
MM PGP9 is not supported right now, AFAIK it is planned.
Thank you for the info.
--
MfG,
Altomailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpebfPImbImp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Current version is 3.95.06 | 'Using
Hello Chris,
Monday, January 15, 2007, 8:17:08 PM, you wrote:
CW Jack S. LaRosa @ 2007-1-15 5:57:15 PM
CW Encryption mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
While I'm not into black helicopters as a rule, I do lean towards
lending some credence to what I've read about Google's data-mining
practices and how
Hello Jack!
On Tuesday, January 16, 2007, 6:02 PM, you wrote:
With this new-found knowledge you've provided I now assume that PGP
or some other encryption utility could be used to completely encrypt
(make un-readable) any email message. True?
True. I use PGP to encrypt private mails
Hi Mary,
BTW, does the current version of TheBat work with PGP Desktop v9? The
v8 version has no issues, but didn't a file get renamed with v9 so
that TheBat wouldn't recognize it any more? Did that issue get
resolved since?
But, be aware, that if you save a message in The Bat! as draft,
Hello Alto!
On Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 10:48 AM, you wrote:
BTW, does the current version of TheBat work with PGP Desktop v9?
The v8 version has no issues, but didn't a file get renamed with v9
so that TheBat wouldn't recognize it any more? Did that issue get
resolved since?
Sorry, I
-mining
practices and how easily it could be subverted. It occurred to me that
perhaps that might be one reason why some people on this list seem to
use encryption, but since I'm always able to view correspondence from
this list without any decryption that I'm aware of, I'm at a loss to
understand
Jack S. LaRosa @ 2007-1-15 5:57:15 PM
Encryption mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
While I'm not into black helicopters as a rule, I do lean towards
lending some credence to what I've read about Google's data-mining
practices and how easily it could be subverted. It occurred to me
that perhaps
TheBat-users,
I would like to copy my tbuser.def from a non-encrypted version of TB
to an encrypted one.
Can this be done?
--
greeting Best regards /greeting
author Peter Fjelsten /author
thebat version 3.85.03 Pro /thebat versionextras MyGate, AVG /extras
env. 2 POP3, 14 IMAP (Courier)
Hello Peter,
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:25:11 +0200 GMT (25/10/2006, 22:25 +0700 GMT),
Peter Fjelsten wrote:
PF I would like to copy my tbuser.def from a non-encrypted version of TB
PF to an encrypted one.
PF Can this be done?
Try and let us know the outcome. ;-)
--
Cheers,
Thomas.
You
Hallo Peter,
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:25:11 +0200GMT (25-10-2006, 17:25 , where I
live), you wrote:
PF I would like to copy my tbuser.def from a non-encrypted version of TB
PF to an encrypted one.
That should happen when you're using OTFE, check for a tbuser.eef
file. (When you're currently
Roelof,
On 25-10-2006 19:52, you wrote in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
PF I would like to copy my tbuser.def from a non-encrypted version of
PF TB to an encrypted one.
That should happen when you're using OTFE, check for a tbuser.eef
file. (When you're currently running plain, create a TB-style
Hallo Max,
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 02:59:04 + (UTC)GMT (12-2-2006, 3:59 +0100,
where I live), you wrote:
M I should have been clearer in my original message. The problem is that these
M notices do not go away. They occur everytime I start The Bat!. I've followed
M their instructions and
Roelof Otten [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Did you configure BayesIt properly? (Told it where to find its files?)
That was the problem. It seems that when you tell the installer to move the MAIL
directory elsewhere, Bayesit will still think its configuration information is
in the default MAIL
Hi all,
Today I upgraded to the latest version of TB! and enabled on-the-fly encryption.
Now when I start TB!, I am prompted to enter the OFTE password. After doing so,
I receive 2 warning notices related to Bayesit.
The first says: It seems that you use encrypted The Bat! Please, provide
Hallo Max,
On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 12:13:39 + (UTC)GMT (11-2-2006, 13:13 +0100,
where I live), you wrote:
M The first says: It seems that you use encrypted The Bat! Please, provide the
M minimal value from Move to junk folder and delete letter (see
Preferences
M Antispam menu in The Bat!)
Hallo Max,
On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 12:13:39 + (UTC)GMT (11-2-2006, 13:13 +0200,
where I live), you wrote:
M Does anyone have any idea on what I need to do to get rid of these messages?
My
M searches have yielded nothing.
M Thanks!
M
M Current
Roelof Otten [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, it's correct about you using an encrypted message base, so just
do what it tells you to do. I can remember having to do the same when
I started with OTFE, back then I was still using BayesIt.
I should have been clearer in my original message. The
Hello TBUDL,
If I remember correctly, at the installation of TB, I chose the On
the fly encryption. It also said something about a password. I
havent seen any option that allows me to input a password. How does
that work? When does it ask me about a password or where do I input
one
Hallo Darrin,
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 07:37:39 -0700GMT (17-6-2005, 16:37 +0200, where I
live), you wrote:
D If I remember correctly, at the installation of TB, I chose the On
D the fly encryption. It also said something about a password. I
D havent seen any option that allows me to input
Hi Darrin,
on Fri, 17 Jun 2005 07:37:39 -0700GMT (17.06.2005, 16:37 +0200GMT here),
you wrote:
D If I remember correctly, at the installation of TB, I chose the On
D the fly encryption. It also said something about a password. I
D havent seen any option that allows me to input a password
Hello Peter,
Friday, June 17, 2005, 12:01:55 PM, you wrote:
Have a look at the lower right part of TB!'s main window. Plain
means unencrypted, and On-the-fly PWD means encrypted. But as Roelof
pointed out, it would be hard to miss the password prompt, so I guess
your entry is Plain.
Looks
Hello Darrin,
Friday, June 17, 2005, 7:03:23 PM, you wrote:
So I guess I
need to make a backup of my files, uninstall TB and reinstall with
OTFE and then import my backup. Is this the correct steps to take?
Thats what I went ahead and did and it works fine now. :)
--
Best regards,
Darrin
Hello Tim.
--On 07 June 2005 21:38 +0100 you wrote about Re[2]: On The Fly Encryption
3.5.25:
Well that's a bit strong. I only asked. Whatever.
No I wasn't trying to be a bit strong, I was trying to save you from
another trouting. Did you read below my signature line?
--
Tony.
M
Hi
On Tuesday 7 June 2005 at 10:18:45 AM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Tim Bicknelle wrote:
Roelof Top posting, i.e., typing all your reply text at the top of your
Roelof message and following it with all quoted text below, is not
Roelof encouraged and we actually request that you not do so on
Hi
On Wednesday 8 June 2005 at 8:27:25 AM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Tony Boom wrote:
Did you read below my signature line?
Very good illustration. I missed that lint, too.
--
Best regards,
MFPA
Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative
Using The
Hi
On Wednesday 8 June 2005 at 10:31:59 AM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], MFPA wrote:
Very good illustration. I missed that lint, too.
Or even, that _line_.
--
Best regards,
MFPA
Put knot yore trust inn spel chequers
Hi MFPA,
-- 08.06.2005 10:59 +0100:
Very good illustration. I missed that lint, too.
Or even, that _line_.
I thought of _h_int. ;)
--
Manuel, http://www.manuel-breitfeld.de
Current version is
Wednesday, June 8, 2005, MFPA wrote:
On Wednesday 8 June 2005 at 8:27:25 AM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Tony Boom wrote:
Did you read below my signature line?
Very good illustration. I missed that lint, too.
Hey, Lint http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lint_programming_tool for
e-mail would bee
Hello Manuel,
On Wednesday, June 8, 2005 at 12:03:23 PM Manuel [MB] wrote:
Very good illustration. I missed that lint, too.
Or even, that _line_.
MB I thought of _h_int. ;)
*l*ined h*int* = *lint* ;-)
Seems to be fair for all to me ;-)
--
1 - 100 of 262 matches
Mail list logo
