GPG doesn't really mean much for people using webmail.
Suggestion there? -CMP On 1/28/07, Daniel Sterling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jon Carnes wrote: > You wouldn't have to check the authentication of every message passing > through, but you could if you wanted to. Ideally though, you would just > check the ones that seem suspicious. Well, if you're talking about issues of trust, GPG does this already, now. If you like, you can only accept properly signed email, and you can go further and only accept properly signed email from people you trust. However, again, for this to work to stop all spam, everybody would have to adopt it, and keys used by spammers would have to be blacklisted. -- Dan -- TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
-- Cristóbal M. Palmer UNC-CH SILS Student -- ils.unc.edu/~cmpalmer TriLUG Vice Chair "There are many roads to enlightenment, and thus many roads back to the One True Debian" --crimsun
-- TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
