PGP signatures

[Paul Wiener]

On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 15:25:35 -0400, Bob Lockie wrote:

>On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 11:57:01 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
>
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>
>>On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:08:43 -0400, Bob Lockie wrote:
>>
>>>I find the PGP signatures annoying and a waste of space.
>>
>>    They, however, serve a purpose, unlike HTML mail.
>
>PGP serves a purpose for some people.
>
>I don't care if it certifies mail on this list.
>
>I personally don't think anything but some business corespondance needs to be signed.
>
>
>>>Can't someone ask for it it they want it instead of including it in every >message?
>>
>>    No.  How would that work?
>
>I don't know, I wondered.
>
>
>>    "Was this message really from you?  Could you send me a signed copy?"
>>
>>    "Uhm, sure."  A few cut and pastes later you'll get a possible copy of
>>the original but not a signed copy of the original.  Defeats the whole
>>purpose of PGP signing.
>
>As I said before, I don't think it is necessary to sing a lot of things.

PGP-signing is for the benefit of the sender, not the receiver, so your
opinion as a receiver is probably not going to influence those who want ot be
protected against having their names forged and their e-mail ID"s stolen.

If you would make use of PMMail Pro's PGP features, you would not encounter
that "waste of space" that seems to bother you.

--
___________
Paul Wiener

paulish@paulish.com
got_the_T-shirt@been-there.com
paulish@cyberjunkie.com
paulish@planetarymotion.net
paulish@thepentagon.com
paulish@usa.net
tinea-pedis@bigfoot.com
KJ6AV@callsign.net
pw@i.am
--------------------------------------------------------