(OT) Seasons Greetings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Chiropter Operators, Have a [add your own adjective here] break if you are having one :) /signing off for a few days - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1241. Lars Dew Sir My Quo ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPghNJMtub/5cfolmEQIlWwCg09byXyX6FnVSNYp7/GT9Np34+8YAoIQA UllwtXqIzoJHpuAKXDyTjpsB =o7DI -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: PGP passphrase caching
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Toby, On Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:25:22 +1100 your time, you said: I don't know whether this is OK, but I'm going to say it anyway: when you start a new thread can you not reply to an existing message and change the subject line please. What happens is that people that are threading messages by reference suddenly get a new topic attached to the middle of an unrelated thread. If you set up a template for The Bat! in your address book you won't have to worry about filling in the To: field, and avoid thread hijacking. All the best :) - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1089. Qualm Drowsy Sire ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPgLyGMtub/5cfolmEQKPFQCfQO+EVvSZkZnFCwth0Q129fgcE1EAoOoi 5TpZrTN4TAAlD3mhxESUjb5D =k3Xz -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Pictures
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Dierk, On Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:16:00 +0100 your time, you said: DH That is why I hate arguments on specifics, in this case bandwidth. That was brave g I don't like X-Face either - I have an X-Face of 269 bytes after trying it out. Apart from anything else, the quality is rubbish. It seems to me that X-Face is better suited to Instant Messengers and 'Avatar-centric' email clients... However, I wouldn't complain at all if there was a better way for photos used for The Bat! AB to be exchanged via TB!/TB! users though. Let's say a check box under your personal photo *in your personal VCard* to allow sending of your photo, and then to add your personal photo to a new message in TB! as an attachment you'd choose a menu entry maybe under Utilities menu such as 'Insert VCard Photo' or something, when you wanted to send your visog to someone in particular for their TB! AB. Yes, I would quite like that. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1988. Warm Qed Sir Lousy ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPgL6F8tub/5cfolmEQJi3ACeNwwZvST1T0AX2LHB5NM3+ox4HCUAn29p 2eyGhTj/hH/a9TvyK6A+AZRC =s8OX -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Pictures
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Dierk, On Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:00:17 +0100 your time, you said: DH Hence, what I suggest is to give Add vCard a submenu: - with photo - DH without photo - just photo Yes, indeed, and I agree that such a submenu would also be a great addition. And of course utilising the vCard photo obviously means not adding useless xtra features like X-Face, but rather building on a useful feature already present in TB! :) - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #2809. Ray Qed I Low Mrs Us ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPgOdkstub/5cfolmEQKMoQCgg7byMj1ME+aAl9Jp2Us0bzKtLQoAn2mK owTiUt0YbA+3hHpYVf8qn3M7 =wsoC -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Getting 'educational' out of the headers?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Tim, On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 11:07:55 + your time, you said: TF or should I be doing that anyway? That's a good question. I don't know whether there is an upgrade path from Educational to Personal to Business etc. I can't see anything on the RITLABS site. But I suppose it you wanted to use TB! in a Business environment you'd need a Business licence, even if you already had an Educational licence. So the same must apply from Educational to Personal I imagine. I expect the moderators here will know (or be able to find out) if there is a way to upgrade an existing licence or not. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #2318. Squaw Mild Err Soy ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPgG7B8tub/5cfolmEQIRAgCfQXm8KY8FlPQMhx9jgTgsulUWKhwAoOqr R4YryMtMkxhDeAoomLle6Mcx =/OEe -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Getting 'educational' out of the headers?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Thomas, On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:37:40 +0700 your time, you said: TF OTOH, I was a Person when I bought TB, and now I am a Student. Should I TF ask for a refund? Naa, hang on 'till you become a fully fledged Person again g It will save you having the bother of downgrading, getting the refund, and then upgrading and giving it back again...look at it as a long term investment ;-) - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1499. Law Qed I'm Roy Ussr ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPgIWkctub/5cfolmEQJvPACgjOcicb5KVOghJ6USEbszSM2XJPIAoNjK SwN7lLxp0pm1XI/oY/dk5OmP =n6hB -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Making PGP work
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Clive, On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 09:59:00 -0500 your time, you said: SB The only thing I can think of is you have selected TB!'s internal SB implementation of PGP rather than the PGP plugin under Tools / OpenPGP SB / Choose OpenPGP version. That would display only the log window. CGS It is true that this option has been selected - I put this in CGS inverted commas because I think it is a default setting. I can't CGS deselect it either as the other options are grayed out and the toggle CGS switch won't switch off. I am not sure where we go from here?? Have you downloaded the PGP dlls from RITLABS? It seems to be that the plugins aren't installed. If, you haven't, visit here and grab them and install them: http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/download.html - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #3036. Was Dry Leo Squirm ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfyR0stub/5cfolmEQLsOACfXuCylCQBDDrTRU2kdHD5prhHtJAAniAt 2KAPN+5uo+ErWY9nThehdllq =2Pzf -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: S/MIME on ML's (was: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused byZoneAlarm)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Richard, On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 07:53:44 + your time, you said: RW After Thomas's excellent mail I wouldn't have thought you *had* much of RW a defence :-) V - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #2515. Qua World Myers Is ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfym48tub/5cfolmEQIHJgCaAgL8a8e1QM8VVLOkCPluL8OffDYAn3km jwVQbSr2XxQLfMtoohi95ST6 =2Okf -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: S/MIME on ML's (was: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused byZoneAlarm)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Miguel, On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 17:36:59 +0100 your time, you said: MAU If I quote your full message is just to show that, as I have just MAU noticed, it looks like S/MIME signed messages do not include the list MAU trailer/disclaimer snip MAU I have reviewed other S/MIME signed messages and no, no trailer. I MAU thought it could be a display problem in TB but looking at the source MAU of the messages shows the trailer isn't there. A list server problem? Well I never noticed that. Nicely spotted Miguel :) Seems to be some kind of hiccup with the list server doesn't there. How peculiar! - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #821. Mira Qed Owly Russ ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfyxjctub/5cfolmEQJS7wCg5t/gzL4ShYzqfFMqiU3KrHb+LZcAoKhs 35cTRIj0z8BCAtt5N4AAg68q =fJ+0 -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: S/MIME on ML's (was: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused byZoneAlarm)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Miguel, On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 18:09:41 +0100 your time, you said: MAU Hello Simon, Well I never noticed that. Nicely spotted Miguel :) MAU Well, I was really going to jump on you ;-) for sending an 8 KB message MAU to just say V and while looking at the source is when I noticed :) ;-) Good job you didn't then :) But then again, we could go sorting through the archives and all start deciding the value of everyone else's messages, even if we haven't contributed to the threads...yes, every message from now on must be relevant to everyone or we'll ... we'll.. umm, do something. And we could count all the messages in the archives where list members have appeared from nowhere to jump into threads they hadn't participated in just so that they could revel in being able to make a snitchy little remark when the thread had obviously ended, and we could add up the wasted bandwidth of all those messages and compare... yes, that would be interesting. Yes, what a good idea...not. g By the way, I am very sorry to every in advance for sending this message with S/MIME. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1232. Lars Qed I My Row Us ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfzBistub/5cfolmEQIGZgCgtkU5+Xwp6IoAnHhPHallO7tzpaIAoK+L SHPnKDWCMxCJXrnmcbvr0jyZ =ubR+ -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Attachement showing in a TAB?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Gerard, On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 17:11:42 +0100 your time, you said: Aha, Gerard had attachments and no banner! This seems to be the very same thing that Miguel so cunningly spotted ;). So perhaps any message with an attachment sneaks into the list without being 'bannered'. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1776. Arm Qed I Owly Ussr ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfzbrMtub/5cfolmEQIUDQCg9UXCzY9x6mVhTA2qIengE7ifV4UAoLOv 5y03JHubsVzFstM1YaUmtKOT =cMaw -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Costas, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:17:03 +0200 your time, you said: MR If I choose Internal Implementation, your S/MIME signatures verify as MR valid. If, however, I choose the Microsoft CryptoAPI implementation MR of S/MIME, your very same message returns a verification of invalid. As I have said, not for me. CP Excuse for interjecting here, not having read this thread from the CP beginning. The beginning is usually a good place to start :) CP I would like to mention that my experience is the same as Melissa's CP regarding the above point. Surely, inconsistent results detract a lot CP from the reliability of S/MIME as a security system. In the nicest possible way, and without meaning to be provocative at all, if you'd read the whole thread you may have followed my reasoning for replying as I did...I am not claiming that my views are any better than Melissa's. They are just my views of course, and nothing more. In reply to you I would say that I don't see S/MIME as being any more inconsistent than PGP, from my experience of both. And when we are talking generally like this, and the reference for our bias seems to be new users to The Bat! (TBUDL) and new users of S/MIME, I don't see how there can be fair criticism. If on the other hand S/MIME can be shown to suffer from this inconsistency in most S/MIME compliant applications then I would probably concede. However, as far as I am aware S/MIME is taken up because of it's simplicity and ease, and it's availability, and the fact that it's use doesn't require third party software. I don't see any evidence beyond this small, isolated discussion, indicating that S/MIME is renowned for being less reliable than PGP, and nor do I believe that a few people having problems with/not understanding how to use certificates in a small user group is fair evidence of S/MIME's unreliability. - From reading various pgp related news groups regularly I am aware of many of the problems that pgp users have setting up and using PGP... problems with initial compatibility/understanding at the user end. They are no different to S/MIME users in that respect. In many respects S/MIME has an advantage, even if I much personally prefer PGP. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #715. Sea World Squirmy ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfs6zMtub/5cfolmEQJjYACdEY/rLQAgD/LFLT0ILX5e7CFu9LIAoJTr BB1pKJgLZJEmLAC0kTvUj1Rr =1Kwt -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Making PGP work
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Clive, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:37:58 -0500 your time, you said: CGS If I do this I get to the point where the PGP log window pops up and CGS that is where the process stops. I am not sure why. Simon asks what CGS version of PGP I have which I think is 6.5. Is that something to do CGS with this? Any ideas? I have been trying everything to replicate this Clive. I am using Imad's build 6.58 build 9 beta 03 with TB! and can't get the import keys window *not* to show. I've changed some settings in PGP options that I thought may cause this but it doesn't make any difference, it still works! The only thing I can think of is you have selected TB!'s internal implementation of PGP rather than the PGP plugin under Tools / OpenPGP / Choose OpenPGP version. That would display only the log window. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #2964. Saw Red Squirm Loy ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfs9S8tub/5cfolmEQKMYACfUZrWFyIypSIr2S4kVoPAin7ewX4An0hr Yp4sdwIk/Uu3nM3+lBo0y/h4 =X7kh -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Julian, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:39:03 + your time, you said: JBL One considerable disadvantage is the size overhead of S/MIME messages I would disagree entirely. JBL the signing process seems to add 6k onto the message size, Not when I sign it doesn't! 3k tops! So I don't know where you get that figure from. JBL and whilst this might be worthwhile for business communications, where JBL the identity of the individual is important, it does not appear to be JBL worthwhile on TBUDL. Oh, I see, so personal identity is inconsequential? cough Okay! And you consider that TBUDL moderators should decide that PGP should be allowed and S/MIME not? Umm, that's very interesting indeed :) ...although that would be very hard to justify as The Bat! supports both, don't you think? And this is The Bat! user discussion list after all, isn't it? Where new users and old congregate to discuss The Bat! features? g JBL At least PGP only adds 1k or so to the message size. Well I think your message is a little misleading, even if unintentional. So to clear up any confusion I carried out some tests: A 629 byte email signed with my S/MIME certificate weighs in at 3,634 bytes. That's only a difference of about 3k, and not the 6k you claim to start. Of course the same 629 byte file PGP clear-signed weighs in at only 993 bytes, which seems to be a very small addition in comparison. *However*, if I then add my PGP key block to the mail as well, which is the true comparison that needs to be made, the 629 byte email suddenly weighs in at 3,591 bytes. So the real differences in size overhead are not that great at all. The mechanism for delivery may be differ - the overall bytes split and delivered in two separate parts - but the size difference isn't significant at all, and of course S/MIME will have an advantage in many respects as the email carries the certificate, unlike PGP, and can be immediately imported without any further requests. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #2076. Mary Qed I Low Ussr ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfuOXstub/5cfolmEQKcxwCgzwrcKmFZH92YrcEmBQJf0vT5jnsAoISc oGuseAqWFooJ2FghCR5IuBEg =aF41 -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Allie, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:10:38 -0500 your time, you said: ACM This is not the case with S/MIME. Can you suppress sending your public ACM key block repeatedly and with every message you send using S/MIME? In ACM fact, this is my main problem with using it. That's not the point here at all really, although it is a valid point of course. So are you suggesting that The Bat! should not support S/MIME? And are you suggesting or leading up to a banning of S/MIME use on the list? ACM You sent an entire message amounting to 650 kbytes. This means that you ACM can send a decently large message that is within 3kbytes in size. Think ACM of the cummulative bandwidth consumption ...snip So what are you saying? That unless it is plain text and pgp signed then it isn't or shouldn't be welcomed? If users want to join the list and ask questions about and learn how to use S/MIME then I don't think it should be discouraged on the basis of bandwidth issues. But if bandwidth really is an issue then you are in a real predicament as to ban the use of one method would automatically suggest favour toward the other, which people can read in many ways of course. I want to be able to securely communicate with as many people as possible, and if that means using both PGP and S/MIME so be it. Yes, with S/MIME you send your cert. over and over and over, unlike PGP, and of course extra bandwidth is used in the process, I concede that. But that's the way to propagate the standard though, and of course the more visible it is the more likely it is to become commonplace, regardless of any bandwidth issues. To to be frank, the bandwidth issue doesn't bother me in the slightest, and I don't think it bothers that many people either, in my unverifiable view. Nonetheless, I accept that it may be of concern for the list owner though, and well, someone will have to make some tough decisions in that case. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1249. Lars Dewy I Mrs Quo ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfut08tub/5cfolmEQKI3gCg02XCkGZsDIpC1XAE7Ezc4qvK4cgAnAyr 2e4LXH1nG9Je0wnESrIYQ0// =cOnk -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Julian, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 22:36:28 + your time, you said: JBL On Saturday, December 14, 2002, 10:16:51 PM, Simon Blake wrote: ACM This is not the case with S/MIME. Can you suppress sending your ACM public key block repeatedly and with every message you send using ACM S/MIME? In fact, this is my main problem with using it. That's not the point here at all really, although it is a valid point of course. So are you suggesting that The Bat! should not support S/MIME? And are you suggesting or leading up to a banning of S/MIME use on the list? JBL What I am suggesting is that S/MIME signing is not necessary in the JBL context of a discussion list where the identity of the poster is not JBL important... snip I really did understand, and call me stubborn, but I still disagree. The delivery method of S/MIME is different to PGP... and I know that some people see it as 'bandwidth unfriendly', but that's the way it works, and people are going to have to learn to live with it. This is the direction that we are moving in: technologies are using more and more bandwidth as they are developed and increase in popularity. Web boards, newsgroup downloads, graphic intensive sites, flash animations, streaming audio and video, software updates, OS updates, desktop delivery, HTML email, S/MIME, etc. all eat bandwidth, and as we are encouraged to use them the 'system' expands - albeit at a price to those hoping to profit out of it - to accommodate our usage. But we _have already moved_ into the bandwidth intensive era as far as I am concerned, and that is being encouraged via the services being levelled at end users. Therefore the Internet bandwidth argument is just fallacious to me. So, suggesting that it is OK to PGP sign because it is bandwidth friendly and not to S/MIME sign because it isn't flies in the face of the current reality. And to accede to others' requests not to use S/MIME would be an immediate submission to very localized preferences and indicate some lacking in ability or will to keep in tune with the way things are moving. JBL I feel that you may think that this discussion is an attack on your JBL rights to use S/MIME or PGP, which it certainly is not, and I am sorry JBL if I have given you this impression, Simon. No, no need to apologize at all, really :) As I have indicated already, in some way or another, if S/MIME certification died a death tomorrow I wouldn't shed any tears - apart from the fact that I'd lose the ability to be able to communicate with a significant percentage of email users. But my lack of grief _wouldn't_ be based on bandwidth considerations, no, but simply on my *preference* for PGP as I personally find it more suited to my uses...and I value the level of control it affords me. I am not really an advocate of S/MIME in the strictest sense as I would push PGP (and do) before S/MIME any day, but I nonetheless acknowledge S/MIME's current value, and believe that other users should comes to terms with its presence and usage. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1436. Awl Qed Rio My Ussr ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfvGBctub/5cfolmEQL0+gCfc/Cs8/AvtY1WbXmgI/8aLkBGzLwAoJM8 JCCSqTLzmx4ycYA63e0TVu7o =24p9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Allie, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 19:27:50 -0500 your time, you said: S That's not the point here at all really, although it is a valid point of S course. So are you suggesting that The Bat! should not support S/MIME? S And are you suggesting or leading up to a banning of S/MIME use on the S list? ACM There's no need to take the discussion in this direction...snip Sorry, I don't understand Allie! I simply asked you two further questions which I didn't think were unreasonable questions and certainly can't see how they could have caused you any offense in any way. Nonetheless, if they did offend you in any way then I of course apologize. ACM Nope. I am simply refuting your comment that 3 extra kilobytes per ACM S/MIME signed message is negligible. It's by no means negligible when ACM you look at it cumulatively. And a point I acknowledged. ACM You mentioned that comparing PGP signatures without including the PGP ACM key block wasn't fair. That is correct the way I was presenting it. And of course I was trying to show that when bandwidth wasn't a consideration that the actual email size for both technologies was very similar when signed and keyed/certificated; I was attempting to dispel the implication that one technology was significantly superior because it was simply smaller in use than the other, which is not the case at all. Cumulatively, I agree that one *uses* more bandwidth than the other. ACM How does this translate to S/MIME signatures not being welcome? It was a question Allie, based on your comments: AM Think of the cummulative bandwidth consumption if everyone were to start AM using S/MIME as you do, i.e., sending the 3kbyte key block with each and AM every S/MIME signed message which is every message? snip Again, I believe it was a fair question based on your above comments. Your remarks certainly don't encourage the use of S/MIME do they: Think of the cummulative bandwidth consumption if everyone were to start using S/MIME as you do. I was getting you to clarify your position, that's all. And now you have done that, and so there's no problem is there :) If users want to join the list and ask questions about and learn how to use S/MIME then I don't think it should be discouraged on the basis of bandwidth issues. But if bandwidth really is an issue then you are in a real predicament as to ban the use of one method would automatically suggest favour toward the other, which people can read in many ways of course. ACM Again, I'm not discouraging or banning the use of it. You're blowing ACM this Waaay out of proportion. I don't feel that I am blowing anything out of proportion Allie. I am responding to your comments, and some other list users concerns, in this interesting thread about PGP and S/MIME standards, and latterly, the excessive use of bandwidth by using S/MIME on TBUDL. I don't see any problem with this, and I don't think anyone has got nasty, or upset, or there is any reason for you to feel that is is *Wy* out of proportion. I do feel that as a moderator when you offer your opinion you cannot expect to be totally detached from your role and as such that you should expect responses such as mine when you indicate personal concerns about cummulative bandwidth consumption by users of S/MIME certificates such as me. I am sorry if that makes you feel uncomfortable or like you are being got at. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #735. Mila Dress Quo Wry ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfvY28tub/5cfolmEQLCmwCgg1LQdGdKeuDSQPVP3qL8X3MxRAUAoN3o Du+8EK60AQodrf3nnN0i1T36 =tb0/ -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: S/MIME on ML's (was: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused byZoneAlarm)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Thomas, On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 08:15:01 +0700 your time, you said: snip I bow out of this thread. Sorry, Thomas, but if you want to email me offlist with your personal remarks then that's fine. I'll defend myself in private. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #155. Dear Squirm Sly Ow ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfvfkctub/5cfolmEQKmGgCgrSiR24+juHErWE0XjsmdzJTiV/oAoOEh xwR46hKRimcNsUPhXema6lF5 =mj4j -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Melissa, On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:01:33 -0800 your time, you said: MR This causes me to feel that a PGP signature is a more reliable digital MR signature standard than is S/MIME (even though there may well be more MR S/MIME users than there are PGP users). I don't believe that this is a fair assumption at all. OpenPGP users have to acquire specific software to be able to set up personal/commercial encryption. In doing so they engage in a learning process which for all intents and purposes is mostly invisible to others. Nonetheless, there is usually a fair learning curve involved, and mistakes are therefore made, but these mistakes usually aren't so visible as S/MIME because software that supports both PGP and S/MIME handle them differently. If The Bat! handled invalid PGP signatures in the same way as S/MIME then there would be many complaints about PGP as well. However, it doesn't mean that PGP is a better standard because people aren't able to immediately see an invalid signature...on the contrary in fact. New S/MIME certificate users generally don't need to download encryption specific software of course as Windows and S/MIME compliant software handle the signing and encrypting processes, but there is still a bit of a learning curve in understanding how to implement S/MIME certificates of course. And because of the way that S/MIME works/is handled in compliant software first time users are 'experimenting out in the open' so to speak as their mistakes are made visible to everyone. But the visibility of their mistakes doesn't mean that S/MIME is any less useful; the new users just haven't passed the S/MIME learning curve yet, and in many cases neither have the recipients of the certificates! As a preference I much prefer PGP to S/MIME as I enjoy the control it affords me by using it. However, S/MIME certificate users are abundant and so it is simply practical and even provident to be willing to use both if you can. I don't expect a non OpenPGP user to install some form of OpenPGP software so that they can communicate with me in privacy if they are already using S/MIME certificates... they have the advantage in many respects as they don't need to install anything but certificates to communicate with me using encryption. I may suggest that they try PGP, but in it is experience, especially of M$ email client users of course, that in the majority of cases they don't want to know. Until one becomes 'the standard', which I can't see happening, I think it is prudent to get to grips with both PGP and S/MIME and encourage others to do the same. Everyone is different and is everyone is going to have their personal preference, so being willing to deal with both will benefit everyone IMO. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1337. Lyra Id Sew Mrs Quo ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfnZMMtub/5cfolmEQIXngCZAfugBTmdLjqXehmeZPWEemDXreUAoLyL HQsfEqpUMKOb0Zb9lcW/Hwxn =Eyz2 -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Mike, On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:09:22 + your time, you said: MA TB. It's called Outpost and is available from http://www.agnitum.com/ MA and no, I have no connection with hem except as a very satisfied user. Of course Victor could always try the 'free for personal use' Sygate Personal Firewall as well, which is far better than ZA as well in my, and many others' opinions :) http://soho.sygate.com/products/shield_ov.htm - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #579. Yale Squid Mrs Row ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfnaJctub/5cfolmEQLWEwCfWEfqN+ykwWEEZlQ2gknPOVcPc/kAoN2t GMa6fdb8/G345Y1LuXil4276 =c+ol -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Melissa, On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:24:41 -0800 your time, you said: MR The fact that by simply switching one's preference for implementation MR method can yield the opposite verification result (valid vs. MR invalid) shows that there is *not* a standard at work here. Not for me Melissa! I tried this and the S/MIME certificates in my many folders all remain valid still. MR With OpenPGP, on the other hand, regardless of email client or MR operating system, if one learns to use it, there *is* a standard at MR work that will produce consistent verification results. I disagree. The S/MIME standard seems to me to be well implemented and correct end implementation seems very much to be down to software vendors and end users. OpenPGP is no greater a standard than S/MIME is, or rather has no greater advantage at the moment than S/MIME, and consistency for both OpenPGP and S/MIME will still ultimately depend on end users. MR Furthermore, I also think that OpenPGP is more versatile, because its MR scope of usefulness goes well beyond a few email clients (and the way in MR which each one seems inclined to implement it). I would agree (and mentioned this in the last reply) with this, to a point. But then again from what I have read and researched there is also much more to S/MIME certification than just signing and encrypting email messages. It has a very useful hierarchical certification structure that doesn't begin and end with email. It's usefulness therefore extends into the same realms as OpenPGP. It is in those realms, the commercial world, that OpenPGP and S/MIME will be 'fighting it out'. MR For countless reasons (including reasons of security), I choose not to MR use a Microsoft email client. Yes, of course, and that's what you and I are both doing here g MR My preferred email client (the great and wonderful Il Pipistrello! of MR course!), gives me two implementation options for S/MIME. I hear your client is very good ;-) My 'Homemade Jam Mailer v10' may in fact share the same appeal vbg MR If I choose Internal Implementation, your S/MIME signatures verify as MR valid. If, however, I choose the Microsoft CryptoAPI implementation MR of S/MIME, your very same message returns a verification of invalid. As I have said, not for me. MR Please tell me how S/MIME can be considered a *reliable* and MR *consistent* standard? It is reliable because once *all* certificates _are correctly imported_ the validation isn't a problem... just as correctly importing *valid* public keys will allow verification also. It is no less consistent than PGP in that sense. MR On the other hand, a Linux user of GnuPG, a Mac user of PGP, a Windows MR user of GnuPG or PGP, etc., regardless of email client software, can all MR *reliably* verify each other's OpenPGP created digital signatures. This is not the case in fact. The *aim* is to make this so, and thereby create a reliable standard, but we aren't there yet, nowhere near. At the moment, if you want to 'reliably' communicate with users of older PGP programs you still have to create a second set of keys for compatibility. There is no cohesion and unity to meet the OpenPGP standard yet. MR It seems to me that the term standard makes more sense here than it MR does with regards to S/MIME. I understand what you mean Melissa, and I can see very much where you are coming from, but I think I will just agree to disagree with you on it. It's early days yet, and the revival of PGP via PGP Corp. needs time to embed, if it ever does. OpenPGP _needs_ a company like PGP Corp. in its ranks for it to stand a chance at becoming the de facto standard, and I don't think it will make it on it's own to be frank, even if I don't like that! - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1752. Ram Squid Lose Wry ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfp+sstub/5cfolmEQLGvgCfcRkKtrG2bogU+OL+YQmjbyZiouEAoJ4N OMlIl6oEpgWOBG0yIfHO9vtI =rbGW -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Making PGP work
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Clive, On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:03:35 -0500 your time, you said: CGS When I open tools/open PGP/PGP decrypt all that happens is that the CGS signature validation log opens up. I have tried saving the key block as CGS a text file and importing it via the public key manager but nothing CGS happens. What am i doing wrong. What PGP version are you using? I have just tried this and it worked fine with Melissa's key mail. Highlight the mail in the message pane and choose Tools/ OpenPPGP/OpenPGP Decrypt and up pops the PGP Log window and minimizes to the tray as the key import window pops up displaying the Melissa's keys to import. If you cancel that a decrypted message is created with un-escaped keys. Nonetheless, whether dash escaped or not, PGP key manager will easily handle importing the key if you simply highlight the key block in the email and copy, and then paste directly into your key manager. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1671. Ma Qed Swirly Sour ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfqUGstub/5cfolmEQLEEgCgodLtYhqMr/fVLW0eOfUUqNJ0PngAoPri NXoSRdyocq8RxAdtIHFFiQxJ =OAjC -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Victor, On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:15:56 -0500 your time, you said: S BTW, your signature (the last 5 messages) has changed to INVALID again. S 8^( It's OK here :) - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #906. Iraq Duly We Mrs So ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfijPstub/5cfolmEQLOJQCgi2EP4iICryTLPoJBaq+/BqlaTwwAoOtC dFBiFyp7EvJAw5XpfY+MYVZl =pEIv -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: I think I got OpenPGP working but a few questions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Thomas, On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:46:08 +0700 your time, you said: Well first of all you'll need to publish your key to the keyserver. TF No you don't. Any key published there can never be deleted. As has been mentioned in reply to your message already, you should really create a revoke key really, and back it up somewhere safe! It would be interesting to know how many PGP users forgot or lost the password to the their very first published key when they started using PGP vbg Indeed, it would be interesting to know exactly how many 'abandoned' keys are stored on the keys servers ;) But to the point, I don't agree. Victor wasn't sporting any reference to a key in his email so his sig couldn't be checked. If you don't want your public key 'public' and want it contained for use only between a select few then of course their is no purpose to publishing it to the keyservers, and I would agree with you there. However, if you want to use a public key so that anyone can contact you using PGP or verify your sig then I reckon publishing is still the best method of distribution. I have made my key available through my domain, and reference it in my email sig. I have also published it on the keyservers so that my signature can be quickly verified and my key imported should someone not wish to go to the trouble of manually grabbing from my site before they can verify my sig. In any event, if you want your keys to remain private then sure, don't publish. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1944. Mars Dry Slew I Quo ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfc8P8tub/5cfolmEQKEQgCg+WBtvZeQYlOug7kwFUWyGI4yFGcAnjx9 RTuEvKBp0jrolsbjEpQlEhqm =VkkJ -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Upgrading the Bat!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Peter, On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:26:32 +0100 your time, you said: Plain Text Viewer / Rick Text Viewer. MSH Is this a setting within TB? If so, how do I change it? PM Yes, it is. You can set it in Options -- Preferences -- Viewer. Yes, but it is referred to as 'Fixed Width Font Viewer' and not Plain Text Viewer. So the abbreviation should really be FWFV and not PTV, but I can understand why it isn't g - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #80. A Squid Lye Mrs Row ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfc/YMtub/5cfolmEQIyDwCg9Fw/H8b0gZ4XDuOz+qcjAxo4JQ8AmwaZ pLlzu3pkbvjB6fWQv6c9UVLi =Z8ut -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Trusted root certificate problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Subhi, On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:31:39 + your time, you said: SSH we have a certificate from Comodo...It doesnt seem to be a trusted CA SSH by the BAT, but it works fine on IE, It should work without a problem. * go to 'Users Passwords' in Control Panel * Click on the 'Advanced' tab, then the Certificates button. * Click on the 'Intermediate Certification Authorities' tab * Highlight Comodo Class 3 Security Services CA in the list * Click on Export and hit next button then: * Select the radio button: Cryptographic Message Syntax Standard PKCS #7 Certificates (.P7B) * check: Include all certificates in certification path * Browse to desktop or a folder and save the file In The Bat!: * Account/properties/Edit personal certificates. * In the Certificates panel, click Import * import the file you exported to the desktop You must then follow the same procedure in TB! to import your Personal Certificate. These certificates work OK because I've tried them :) You should have 3 entries in your certificate pane once you've imported the CA and your certificate. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #2097. Sam Qed Luis Worry ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfeJ6ctub/5cfolmEQLsxgCg0q000cLGWfAzd5Qt7VLwazLJQwIAn2xb IPY+Me8DxOVjrLgCHj3muxnP =eQkv -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Acessing my Hotmail account
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Granville, On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 02:54:20 + your time, you said: GC Hello, fellow Batters. I have a Hotmail account... Can you not hijack other people's threads and start your own in future :-/ It makes a real mess of threading by reference. Ta! - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #2027. Mawr Red Is Sly Quo ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfYHMctub/5cfolmEQLKTwCdGHzhrKMxxfoqoXBlaM+rRnTG64AAnRGG FLDpy4GFgNllBxLq/BxRY0OH =PMQc -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Message flags
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Ochrid, On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:22:30 +0100 your time, you said: TM Can anyone think of any I missed? O Perhaps the one I was asking about before? Simone Blake's signature? O See: http://www.xs4all.nl/~hogen/ It indicates the message has an S/MIME digital certificate :) - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #863. Iraq Dyer Slum Sow ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfYotctub/5cfolmEQINdQCbBI30bWluCPDw/iVVvr7AWwXVp0kAoIR5 6+rIj1G2xl4QKt4DltKfWpoj =OS00 -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Message flags
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Tim, On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:41:44 -0500 your time, you said: TM Hey Roger, TM My MUA believes 'The Bat! (v1.62 Christmas Edition) Personal' was used TM to write [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tuesday, TM December 10, 2002 at 1:01:32 PM. RP Many thanks for the trouble you took to answer my query. Just what I RP was looking for. TM Welcome, kind of fun assembling. RP There is one other that I have seen, I think it had a tick (or perhaps RP an arrow) in the top right corner of the envelope. TM A check in a yellow circle. RP It seemed to correspond to having something like 'sig'(?) in the column RP (window) where attachment info. appears. TM Yep, Thomas F. replied to this same subject describing it. I am working TM on getting one with an appropriate subject line so I can include it in TM the image. Which I sent ;) However, I would just like to add that I do believe that it is supposed to represent a little bat and not a tick/check mark ... well that's what it looks like to me :) - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #2592. Quay Sled I Mrs Row ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfZjMMtub/5cfolmEQJHvwCg4mONvtVV0rYp78/2cWTVaERNuIMAoMma HkglZlnkeuB+95SroWV6wv5l =asky -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: I think I got OpenPGP working but a few questions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Victor, On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:43:31 -0500 your time, you said: VBG I understand PGP will help to prove my identity but then where do VBG certificates come into play? Well first of all you'll need to publish your key to the keyserver. I just tried to check your pgp sig and got nothing. So your sig is of no use really if it can't be verified or I can't import your public key. VBG as I need but will combining a PGP signed message along with a VBG certificate be wise or redundant? The PGP v S/MIME digital certificate question really depends on your requirements and recipients. If you only expect to use PGP encryption to communicate with a few PGP enabled people then there probably would be no point with the S/MIME certificates. However, if you are expecting to be able to use encryption between you and M$ LookOut and LookOut Express users who aren't PGP enabled then you'll have a reason to use S/MIME certificates as you can use your digital certificate to send those users encrypted messages - - M$ clients are S/MIME compliant. So, to be able to encrypt mail to as many users as possible, use both, as both are being well used. But if you couldn't care tuppence about S/MIME users because you'll only be dealing with the PGP clan stick with PGP g - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1157. Asylum Qed Sir Row ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfZs48tub/5cfolmEQJEkACfZzsJI2NuVzTor98xt+Y9Hs+ucFYAoOTP yvrJSCuOAgZZxkEo4k4Dqgxu =FCUG -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: pgp 8
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo David, On Mon, 9 Dec 2002 02:46:55 + your time, you said: Where can I get version 6.58? pgp.com only has v8 available for download. DE ftp://ftp.zedz.net/pub/crypto/incoming/ Yes, and also Imad's page: http://freepages.computers.rootsweb.com/~irfaiad/ The links for PGP 6.58 build 08 are in the *middle* of the page. The drop down links don't work. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.61 on W2K SP3 #1361. Aryl Qed Sis Rum Ow ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfSmUstub/5cfolmEQIrDwCfQEo2eB7hfQtjL0YKOEk6jh8ENTgAoI6B VfYvCaCgj4eyzwlKLHbhpEMp =5kpQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Maximizing TB! using command line...can you?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Chiropter Operators, Is it possible to maximize The Bat! using command line parameters when it is minimized to the tray? I want to be able to maximize TB! and bring it into focus via another app without using multiple keystrokes. At the moment, the command line in the other program (the one that launches TB!) looks like this: [path to TB!]\The Bat!\thebat.exe /nologo /CHECK* I've has it like this for a while, but wondered if it was possible to cut out the next action of having to manually maximize TB!? Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.61 on W2K SP3 #2464. Qua Lid Somers Wry ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfTagMtub/5cfolmEQJnawCeNJSxs+SRrFOpHsMm5dmZvzWlMFIAnR0g jjI0wWggvsCFfWdZFFiCjZXp =udDe -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Maximizing TB! using command line...can you?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Geoff, On Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:19:58 + your time, you said: GL FWIW, I have TB set to open maximised. You don't say which OS you're GL using, but assuming you have the permissions... That's not what I meant actually :) And also, the OS I use is in my sig ;-) Launching TB! maximized isn't a problem of course and can be done using a shortcut as you describe - I start TB! minimized using the /MIMIMIZE command line parameter. What I was after was maximizing TB! from the tray when 'called' from another program. I have a spam checker in front of TB! that is similar to Mail Dispatcher but has many more useful features. After selecting which mail is OK and which is not in the spam software, I hit a 'Process' button which deletes unwanted mail and processes any other filters that may be set up. I can also set on option in the program to set the path to my email client, TB! in this case of course, so when you hit 'Process', which I do, it opens the email client. However, I always have TB! running in the tray, as I've said, so I set the path in the spam software with TB!'s /NOLOGO /CHECK* parameters. This means that when I hit the process button TB! collects the email after the spam software has processed incoming mail but it stays minimized in the system tray. What I after is a way to have TB! maximize from the tray when I hit the 'process' button in my spam software without having to hit another key combination. GL Of course, this is academic, given that you're using Homemade Jam GL Mailer v10, and not TB! vbg Yes, of course g - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1902. Mars Qed I Slur Yow ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfT8qstub/5cfolmEQJ2ygCeIWS67afrW6jeKJsTxj4qdnoW4m4An3sv H6MHOGe+jzd7kjCSZmIe1OWE =ohch -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: pgp 8
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo tom, On Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:27:29 +0100 your time, you said: t is there a plugin for pgp 8? will there ever be such a plugin? To continue on from Peter's post: Until the time - if ever there is one - that a PGP 8.0 plugin becomes available you could of course use PGP 6.58 CKT, which is completely free, has a plugin for The Bat!, and works flawlessly with it! And 6.58 ckt is compatible with W2K and WXP (Thanks Allie ;-) ). - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.61 on W2K SP3 #562. Seal I'd Mrs Quo Wry ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfNg7ctub/5cfolmEQJboACg5ksAOxPcp4b2wSOVw76lfnoNmHIAoOla X5yQYVkgsMGXZvFDYo9ynf0B =JTdS -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Query re use of generic email addresses
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo David, On Fri, 6 Dec 2002 17:00:09 + your time, you said: DF What I need is (say) for an email like [EMAIL PROTECTED] where DF 'thiscontact' could be 1 of about 400 and when the email is received in DF TB for it to be sent out 'as is' to the real recipient. I take it the *@xyz.org.uk address is a catchall address, and that you can't offer your list members aliases at the mail server rather than redirect via TB!? I know that isn't what you asked, but just wondered why you choose to have the messages routed via TB! and not redirected at the mail server. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.61 on W2K SP3 #2722. Raw Qed Luis Mrs Yo ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfDlostub/5cfolmEQLpjgCg8L0eEBFe2UleHKHKofeXy2RKD7UAn2E1 x5usLV1alMkywh2mqvJPc06N =K2bv -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: plse explain value of MIME certificate
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Jan, On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:27:06 -0500 your time, you said: JR Hello Bat Folk. JR However when I look @ it, it shows that I issued the certificate to JR myself I'm wondering if this is right; No, this is wrong. The self-signed certificate has no value at all. Did you request the certificate from Certum.pl ? If yes, then you should have received an email asking you to reply to it. After that, they send you your certificate, which you import. You don't seem to have the certificate from the CA yet. JR I'm not sure I understand the value to the msg receiver to know that I JR issued myself a MIME certificate. There is none. Once you receive and import a valid certificate that will of course change everything. Anyone else with a valid certificate can sign their messages, you can import their certificate and use it to encrypt mail to them. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.61 on W2K SP3 #1673. Ma Qed Wily Or Ussr ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPe+JfMtub/5cfolmEQLzwgCg3LJxB5bAcW6e38bkLbCzObrB7usAnibt 0kxqY17+1+ISaIH7kp/zHew+ =vclG -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: OT: Re: Upgrading OS, adding a drive and downloading the latestBat.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Thomas, On Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:20:14 +0700 your time, you said: TF I would use the C: drive as the boot drive, D: as the programs drive, TF and E: as the data drive. At least, that is how my next machine will TF look like. F: will be the backup drive, but it will be the second TF physical HDD. I used to do it like that as well. But when I found some inexpensive USB 2.0 drive enclosures I decided to make my my backup drives portable. The good thing is of course you keep it powered down when you aren't using it, and it plugs straight into any USB port and shows as another hard drive. The new version of Ghost provides support for USB devices and it is a breeze imaging to a USB backup device, and restoring. Well worth it. Re the drives: if you caddy the primary and secondary drives you can try W2K without giving up on 98SE - I eventually stuck with W2K and have been very happy with it... incredibly stable OS. And to bring this somewhere in line with TB! because I feel guilty now about the OT topic ;-) if you have a USB memory card reader you can keep your TB! message base on a memory card instead of the hard drive...that's how I have it set up. I've got a small Sandisk USB compact flash card reader on my desk with a 128MB compact flash card stuffed in it. All my messages, my PGP keys, and certificates, etc. are stored the memory card. When I leave the computer I take the little memory card with me and my messages and keys as well :) In fact, the card is always with me when I'm booted down or away from my PCs. It really is quite an inexpensive way of keeping your messages safe, and very secure. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.61 on W2K SP3 #1097. Qualm Dry Rise Sow ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPfAUz8tub/5cfolmEQKjvACfffKZx4O0ZFSJWiLhWt01HKNWKe4AoMIW OBWetFKKLx18hh/CFKEFp2h9 =7UBK -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: How to disable S/MIME
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Mary, On Wed, 4 Dec 2002 19:52:54 -0600 your time, you said: MB How can S/MIME be permanently disabled in The Bat!? * Open Account Properties * Select 'Options' in the left-hand pane * uncheck the 'enable S/MIME' in the bottom right-hand corner right below 'enable OpenPGP' :) - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.61 on W2K SP3 #2446. Qua Wed Slim Sorry ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 iQA/AwUBPe6z0stub/5cfolmEQKaDgCgsUjeQ/0QvA3hXgn28+6xwacOh28An1z5 Vp7zw9q5Z0tYyBZp1c8E+ulS =Si8u -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
