Re[2]: One time encryption

2008-09-18 Thread Dan Lester
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,

Re[2]: One time encryption

2008-09-18 Thread Dan Lester
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

Re[2]: One time encryption

2008-09-17 Thread Dan Lester
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.

Re[2]: One time encryption

2008-09-17 Thread Dan Lester
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 ...?

Re[2]: One time encryption

2008-09-17 Thread Dan Lester
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.

Re[2]: One time encryption

2008-09-16 Thread Gunivortus Goos
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