PGPTools and PGPKeys

[Trevor Smith]

On Thu, 04 May 2000 18:44:54 +0100 (BST), Simon Bowring wrote:

>>Hmm, you've got me there. I have gone to 5.0i so I can't comment on
>>2.6.x, except that after a quick look at Hobbes, it shows them as
>>supporting PGP 5.0. Do you still use 2.6.x then?
>
>Yep, it ain't broke, so I've no need to fix it!

There are very good reasons to stop using PGP 2.6.x. One such reason
is the fact that the need for backward compatibility with people like
you (am I calling you "backward"? <g>) keeps us all mired in a
horribly confusing situation. This makes it even more difficult for
non-PGP users to understand.

There are also issues with licenses, patents, laws, etc. with older
PGP versions which are partly or completely eliminated with newer
versions.

If someone would port GnuPG to OS/2 (it's allegedly possible to
compile it on OS/2 2.x), we could dispense with *all* the license,
patent, etc. complications. It's free, it's open, it's completely
modern and it's based on/compliant an Internet "working
group"-derived standard.

In short, PGP 2.6.x has been drastically improved upon. Yes it
"works" but there are still many good reasons to stop using it.
Please do.

(If you've been using PGP so long that you're stuck on v2.6.x,
possibly you're reasons for using PGP run more along the "paranoid"
lines. If that's the case, keep in mind that PGP 2.6.x is aging. It's
just a matter of time -- if it hasn't happened already -- before the
NSA breaks it, either by "brute force" resources or by some more
devious method.)


-- 
 Trevor Smith          |          trevor@haligonian.com
 PGP public key available at: www.haligonian.com/trevor

PGP Public Key Fingerprint= A68C C4EC C163 5C0A 6CFA  671F 05D4 0B30 318B AFD6