From: Alan Pugh Area: Public Key Encryption To: Bud Marks 29 Jul 94 09:06:06 Subject: PGP Shell for OS/2 ??? BM>I'm looking for a good OS/2 shell for PGP. I love PGPSHELL, but it's DOS BM>only (I can use it, but it wastes a lot of OS/2 features I'd like to have BM>access to.) BM>Help appreciated. BM> * Origin: Center Of The Universe BBS - (913)894-5173 - ZyXEL 16.8 (1:280/323 i wrote one in vrexx that works pretty good. if the above is where you post from, i can upload it an let you take a look. you'll need vrexx (freeware from ibm) to make it work. if you don't have it, let me know and i'll upload it as well. amp ___ X OLX 2.1 TD X We're all involuntary servitudinal slaves... 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Alan Pugh Area: Public Key Encryption To: Tim Bradley 30 Jul 94 09:48:00 Subject: Re: Amiga PGP Questions TB>-> did you try using the '+clearsig=on' switch on the command line? TB> No, I hadn't -- and it works! Thanks very much! TB>-> i have a program called 'pgpshell' that seems to work pretty good for TB>-> this type of thing. it is small and somewhat primitive, but since that TB>-> is pretty much what i need, it suffices for me. TB> Is this an Amiga program? Or perhaps a peecee program that includes TB>source code so I can maybe port it? (I refuse to even TOUCH Mac Code :<) it's pc code. the author, g.k. pace hangs out on _public_keys_ sometimes. if ya drop him a line, he might be able to help. from what i understand, there are several programs of this type and also a more recent version of pgpshell. (the copy i have is version 0.03). i haven't bothered to upgrade or even really look around as i like the simplicity of the program. i wish it could be directed throuhg command line switches though. later, amp ___ X OLX 2.1 TD X --T-A+G-L-I+N-E--+M-E-A+S-U-R+I-N-G+--G-A+U-G-E-- 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Nolan Lee Area: Public Key Encryption To: Ian Hebert 1 Aug 94 02:56:38 Subject: EFF Analysis of Vice-Pres On Jul 28 20:27 94, Ian Hebert of 1:2401/114@fidonet.org wrote: IH> The Vice-President's letter to Rep. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) IH> made it clear that while Clipper might have a small place in IH> the telephone security market, it has no future in the IH> digital world. "...[T]he Clipper Chip is an approved IH> federal standard for telephone communications and not for IH> computer networks and video networks. For that reason, we IH> are working with industry to investigate other technologies IH> for those applications.... We welcome the opportunity to IH> work with industry to design a more versatile, less IH> expensive system. Such a key escrow system would be IH> implementable in software, firmware, hardware, or any IH> combination thereof, would not rely upon a classified IH> algorithm, would be voluntary, and would be exportable." IH> Clipper does not meet most of these criteria, so, according IH> to the Vice- President, it is a dead end. Damn, I don't *HOW* I'll be able to sleep anymore. IH> END OF THE LINE FOR CLIPPER -- LONG-RUN EFFORT TO DRIVE IH> MARKET WILL FAIL I don't understand why they didn't see this from the very start. thanks for the post, it was informative, later, Nolan 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Jerome Greene Area: Public Key Encryption To: Ryan Shaw 31 Jul 94 11:33:22 Subject: New to PGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- -=> Ryan Shaw wrote in a message to All<=- Hello Ryan, RS> signatures the norm in Fight-o-Net? Also, what is the view RS> on the use of PGP signatures in Fight-o-Net echos? It seems to me IMO, that most, if not all echoes present excepted :-) view digital signatures as a waste of band-width. Jerome ... An ounce of security is worth a pound of defense. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLjvTXXF52VfebiBFAQFRGgQAiPKs7tu6CMkTusl4Z2S6etsI91yrNbf0 12uELAjanLyLBomAEiVl1YdEWzQF+2kmx3l/zi1/iEuQ+BzTlHXjNdU6p+C3Hg4x vrshmtyULllEp5mqANeymOAa0lxViiyhZQYQxPVnRSRCDc1zlc9+dhk5JgnZZR+r XtdK0MkbIPo= =pqpu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: jason carr Area: Public Key Encryption To: Christopher Baker 1 Aug 94 10:22:20 Subject: Re: New to PGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Christopher Baker wrote in a message to Ryan Shaw: CB> FidoNews used to have a PGP public-key when Tom Jennings was CB> editor. [sigh] You mean that the Snooze itself was clearsigned? Hmmmm, good idea... CB> Echomail content is up to the Moderator of every Echo. To what degree, though, I wonder... I mean, do you think an echo could be removed for including digisigs or posting blocks (other than your own echoes, I mean)? Did you have any problems with the fidogods about starting these echoes? jason -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLj0v5EjhGzlN9lCZAQGBqAP+PtqEVTPJt0+Rcs66nUv2WjOgWj5CScLm ZWtFBCTBbGwisw9ePYkjB/3N6C8VeheWuS9Hi/N4QlI9bQdgoo4AiI95mdR0Sr7j b1xIiAVAoknNOpOmusi2S5+ZxaMwa2XthEdNSChemLkNfqvnbsQN5o6xQyIFWIk3 /4QKz1ypEqk= =L2hJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ...Key fingerprint = 60 97 B2 AE 7D 90 11 2F 05 1C 35 98 E9 B9 83 61 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Christopher Baker Area: Public Key Encryption To: Mike Lippai 1 Aug 94 14:12:08 Subject: Re: Public Keys -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In a message dated: 30 Jul 94, Mike Lippai was quoted as saying: ML> I have a burning question. How does one put out his public key? I ML> mean what do you have to to to make the file or whatevr it is you ML> send out?? pgp -kxa [yourname] [filename] will create FILENAME.ASC which you can then make available for download [as YOURNAME.ASC] and/or file-request [as PGPKEY]. you can also import this .ASC file into any msg or text file for distribution. you can load it into a msg in the PKEY_DROP Echo where we put public-keys. ML> I have read the docs a Gazillion times with no clue yet. Lets say I ML> want to send encrypted messages to a freind, how do I get his public ML> key, and how does he get mine?? you go over to his house and get a copy or you freq PGPKEY from him. he does likewise. ML> I'm not sure this is the right conference for this, but...... this is the ONLY conference 'for this'. [grin] welcome to the Echo. TTFN. Chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 Comment: PGP 2.6 is LEGAL in Zone 1! So USE it! [grin] iQCVAgUBLj0668sQPBL4miT5AQGBjAP/WeFNi0w9AG2UgkVq/YklNFp3fwgj+AGJ CpI0Uy4lln2PBkM8Zzl21u83W+3H+vz4NMjP5k+aPVJZyQ8BWoe8ufV0L/KRmtdz xGJg5vbnNjH5I78Sw8Usq9o7LwuWJx6yfzRYrG2HDVx59FYhEX2Fgibz+7f5VrZk AzUIhb9ulJU= =EhZK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Christopher Baker Area: Public Key Encryption To: Jason Carr 1 Aug 94 14:14:04 Subject: Net 106 still at it? [Was: New to PGP] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In a message dated: 30 Jul 94, Jason Carr was quoted as saying: JC> But that would effectively cut off the flow to 106 (houston, I JC> think) where they delete any msg with the string "PGP" in it. they do not deliberately alter or censor mail in Net 106 do they? TTFN. Chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 Comment: PGP 2.6 is LEGAL in Zone 1! So USE it! [grin] iQCVAgUBLj07X8sQPBL4miT5AQEQEgP/cOwRVvodXwXA1jmdqPKzLUz47a5PCNlY Rs6HHT3lhgEQgp4WK+pKoTSrtl9eFvb/F3/gDsyuEt+CDvsXKdLQHlK4CJXJYRu+ IsugxNy/WYLk+0jmWNIAJK9a7nC1MdCuYKvokJ7rG8OL9za0+YWPzaWyJoMsh/dm ZclBNhw5FsM= =PG12 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Jim Grubs Area: Public Key Encryption To: Christopher Baker 1 Aug 94 10:06:04 Subject: Echo sources [Was: Re: My public key] > 'Fight-o-Net' is a figment that exists only in the minds > of certain > folks in New Jersey. And their AltarNut is dying on the vine...[:-) Sincerely, Jim Grubs 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718