[6752] in Kerberos
Re: done any survey on who uses pub key cryptography?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Leyland)
Fri Feb 23 18:46:47 1996
To: kerberos@MIT.EDU
Date: 22 Feb 1996 14:57:24 GMT
From: pcl@sable.ox.ac.uk (Paul Leyland)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <Pine.SUN.3.91.960220102033.3702H-100000@cscf15> John Margaritsanakis <imarga@essex.ac.uk> writes:
> Which is true... Most people *I* know are computer literate. and in
> fact use advanced programs for their e-mail all the time -- custom made
> config files in pine/elm, self-made .mailrc files, and anyway cannot be
> called "ignorant"...
> They just couldn't care less! Their age-old excuse ("if somebody
> wants to read my crappy e-mail, let them!") is completely unbeatable by
> the arguments I can present to them. The little extra trouble of typing
> their PGP pass phrases every time they sent out e-mail, or even
> installing the shells for their favourite programs to use cryptography
> (even if they take lots of time to install completely useless stuff,and
> that's to their *knowledge*) is way too much for them.
We (that is I 8-) have installed PGP, pgpelm and mailcrypt.el as
standard utilities on sable.ox.ac.uk, Oxford University's main Unix
service. It makes life a bit easier for those who don't want to do very
much. I agree, though, that the users still need to generate their keys
and to click on the appropriate button in Emacs-Rmail or menu-item in
Elm
> I agree with you in essence though -- *most* people will *never* use
> cryptography of any kind as long as it's not implemented in their own
> software packages and easy to use... But I think most people in this
Try looking at http://www.ac.uk.pgp.net/pgp/ukerna.html for UK developments
in this field.
One thing we are investigating is the possibility of providing seamless
integration of PGP into the MUAs used by 95% of JANET.
> group are paranoid enough to know that comfort will always come to the
> expense of security, the more you have of the one, the less you can have
> of the other.
> All in all, I'm just waiting to take a look at the implementation of
> the new version of PGP -- they claim the new module structure will be
> easy to include in already existing software packages.
We are waiting too. However, a remarkable amount can be done with 2.x.
The integration of PGP with Emacs in mailcrypt.el is pretty damned good,
IMAO. I use it both for mail, and as here, for news.
For PGP integration with a number of utilities, look at
ftp://ftp.pgp.net/pub/pgp/utils/README.html
Paul
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface
iQCVAwUBMSyESDt/x7zOdmsfAQEHPgP+Ozvltw34e2NUrA31dxirJZv3nsCkvFRI
1WdEyXnCWiVlnFJmBNPZXquVFScVhcv80jlDYET5hM6Qu5ZWdGkVEIQB7v9ku9iu
9q42BasjZz4IyCT16kImzZifgwmrTVPaVZ/WzkbFrYHNd3s9WbIkuJe2BL4KExbD
wiFyVLg1sic=
=yMhu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Paul Leyland <pcl@oucs.ox.ac.uk> | Hanging on in quiet desperation is
Oxford University Computing Services | the English way.
13 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 6NN, UK | The time is gone, the song is over.
Tel: +44-1865-273200 Fax: 273275 | Thought I'd something more to say.
PGP KeyID: 0xCE766B1F
