[82316] in Cypherpunks
Re: New PGP signatures
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bennett_t1@popmail.firn.edu)
Mon Jun 23 14:11:31 1997
From: bennett_t1@popmail.firn.edu
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 13:07:08 -0500
To: Mark Grant <mark@unicorn.com>
Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com
Reply-To: bennett_t1@popmail.firn.edu
Mark Grant wrote:
> Could I humbly request that people don't post the new (SHA?) PGP
> signatures to the list for the time being as it's a pain in the ass
> for
> those of us outside the US who don't yet have the ability to read
> them.
> PGP 2.6.x error handling doesn't know what to do with them and it
> breaks
> our mail-processing code.
>
> Mark
Well, I still use my RSA key for all signings and encryptions since
about 85% of PGP users don't use the new Diffie-Hellman keys, and some
asshole forgot to make PGP 5.0 freeware RSA key-generating. Luckily I
can still use my RSA key. Plus, some assholes didn't take into account
that not everyone uses Windoze95/NT 4.0 or Macintrash, and didn't make
one yet for Unix or OS/2 or DOS or Windoze 3.1 users. My friend still
uses 3.1 and I have to use my RSA key to talk to him.
I hope you guys with the international PGP get to use 5.0 soon. It's
really nice, all things about it excluded.
