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 that might be one reason why some people on this list > seem to use encryption Think of normal e-mail messages as postcards. Encrypted e-mail messages are letters in (really strong, tamper evident) security envelopes. > 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 the purpose this encryption. If I can view the email > apparently un-encrypted, where's the protection encryption > supposedly provides? Or am I completely missing the purpose of such > encryption? These e-mail messages are not encrypted; they are signed. If you inspect this message's source, you will see that there is a checksum included. This, along with my public key, will allow you (with the correct software) to determine whether this message has been modified in transit (which it shouldn't have). -- Chris Using The Bat! v3.95.6 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2. Accessing a POP3 mailbox. Today's Oxymoron: Extinct Life
pgpyQXA4lQsPK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
________________________________________________ Current version is 3.95.06 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
