From: Lloyd Warren Area: Public Key Encryption To: Christopher Baker 15 Aug 94 15:38:00 Subject: Re: Pkey_drop Chris... CB> LW> The bbs I read this group from doesn't seem to have the PKEY_DROP CB> LW> echo, nor do I find "any" keyring files. CB> hmmh. ask the Sysop to add it. it comes from the same source as this CB> one. Will do! CB> LW> Do you echo to and/or retrieve from any Internet sites reachable CB> LW> via anonymous ftp? CB> no. but keys posted there do end up on the Internet servers. I generally pick up the key updates at MIT. Suspect that most everything eventually gets threre that hits anywhere in the Internet system. Thanks for the information! lcw --- ATP/DJgcc 1.42 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Rodney Payne Area: Public Key Encryption To: All 14 Aug 94 17:00:26 Subject: how does Can someone expalin the process of making a token ring and adding the keys and how do I get the public keys 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Kevin Lo Area: Public Key Encryption To: All 13 Aug 94 15:57:06 Subject: -- Help -- Greetings All, How do I get PGP to sign a a GoldED message, with high-ascii in it (my box) without treating it as a binary file? I tried changing the charset to ASCII, cp850 (something like that) and alt_codes, and still nothing worked. I tried: 'pgp +force -sta golded.msg' at the command line. Thanks in advance! Kevin Kevin LoInternet: dt194@nextsun.ins.cwru.eduFreq' KEVLO.ASC FDC MerlinFidoNet: 1:374/98.5 (Palm Bay, Fl)@1:374/98 - PGP Key ... I know the Captain's orders -- Engage. Riker 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Kevin Lo Area: Public Key Encryption To: Dan Booth 15 Aug 94 09:12:06 Subject: Re: Dallas Area Or Internet Greetings Dan, -=-= On 12 Aug 94 at 22:06, you wrote to All =-=- DB> Hi I'm trying to locate the file PGP26.zip either in the Dallas, TX area DB> or somewhere on the Internet? Any help would be appreciated....thanks in DB> advanced. The 'official' release site of PGP is net-dist.mit.edu in the /pub/PGP directory. Kevin LoInternet: dt194@nextsun.ins.cwru.eduFreq' KEVLO.ASC FDC MerlinFidoNet: 1:374/98.5 (Palm Bay, Fl)@1:374/98 - PGP Key ... Fartvergnugen.. the pleasure of breaking wind. 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Christopher Baker Area: Public Key Encryption To: Kevin Lo 15 Aug 94 13:33:46 Subject: Re: -- Help -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In a message dated: 13 Aug 94, Kevin Lo was quoted as saying: KL> How do I get PGP to sign a a GoldED message, with high-ascii in it why would you want to put high ASCII in Echomail? isn't that a no-no in most Echos? TTFN. Chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6a Comment: PGP 2.6 is LEGAL in Zone 1! So USE it! [grin] iQCVAgUBLk+m78sQPBL4miT5AQGuvgP/SYUrwIDaYnq+/ZO3ZZjom2AFy9nmAfWB K4AVF/XurvhM5Lo6Huy595Fl1v7c807MGqwrAbZEhGJbmWUoq/NH30zvyk9XTQDx lMa78vHeYj7Ox/iJRT0Ss5KOr0SM+tiKY1aiOuZP1PR0emTnp97CAi6Mq9Mhf07R zkuMEqXfgtQ= =ag3V -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Christopher Baker Area: Public Key Encryption To: Ted Rolle 15 Aug 94 13:36:26 Subject: Re: PGP distribution. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In a message dated: 14 Aug 94, Ted Rolle was quoted as saying: TR> Would it be possible to put all of the "sensitive" PGP-related TR> things into a separate .TIC thingy? Other than PUBKEYS? sure. whatever works. TR> My reason is that I don't want systems outside of Zone 1 freqing TR> it, so I am putting these files into their own protected area, only TR> available to systems that have set up a password with me. good idea! TR> Or, is this contrary to PUBKEYS policy? not at all. PUBKEYZ1 is now established. thanks. TTFN. Chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6a Comment: PGP 2.6 is LEGAL in Zone 1! So USE it! [grin] iQCVAgUBLk+njcsQPBL4miT5AQFFOwP/aBZoU/oCAVPs31/KybIm4CaOqW0ivuS9 G7idVAKj0lMLqtP2WozGg5McSNfToL3SwhJh93g9i+NWqgNiK4IsQd5mZ8ni6nku u37jhQvrXWipl02VluiGn1jW8gRsuanSR4tB8b8ruvOX+29o0yi5aVOn2moT5R6x if1ZyJx3QUA= =+J1Q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Christopher Baker Area: Public Key Encryption To: Mike Riddle 15 Aug 94 13:40:56 Subject: Re: PGP 2.6 for the Amiga 1.1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In a message dated: 14 Aug 94, Mike Riddle was quoted as saying: CB> PGPAMIGA for all the above. ZONE 1 NODES ONLY! ITAR CB> restrictions apply to executables! MR> Actually, ITAR is alleged by those whom it matters to apply to MR> source code as well. A court has yet to rule, so their MR> interpretation should be considered definitive (for the moment)> thanks. i've been treating them way anyway. source for executables will also be hatched only in PUBKEYZ1 to avoid inadvertant release outside Zone 1. TTFN. Chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6a Comment: PGP 2.6 is LEGAL in Zone 1! So USE it! [grin] iQCVAgUBLk+oncsQPBL4miT5AQGnxgQAo4rU3o06tG3lvRFcZxcf1XXRA1ojKg7i sfxbZ80XXhvLe715rWA+ph6bI6YiDaE4h4/I5ksM9RAVlX5AGFNBcaWlD9oquvIo CaMlrv+YdaHgZoh1enob7tVl7bhGxO+EpQprFORvHsSBapt2vZrPKc8j2RpNImwg hYVT6lNTzog= =C8p5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Daryl Turner Area: Public Key Encryption To: Scott Mills 15 Aug 94 20:14:12 Subject: Re: Net 106 still at it? In a message of <14-Aug-94 18:38:40> Scott Mills (1:265/119) wrote: SM> But to find that encrypted traffic the sysops must me reading all the SM> "private" net mail that goes through their systems. I could have sworn SM> that was against the law. If you want private, send it direct. If you want to route, you give up some privacy. Also, what might be against the law in your country isn't against the law in mine...in fact, *I* may be held legally responsible for anything sitting on my computer waiting to be sent to my downlinks. Please remember that FidoNet <> United States of America. Daryl Moderators die at an early age; murdered by their wives. -*- ASTG 0.7 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Mike Riddle Area: Public Key Encryption To: Rebellious Guerrilla 15 Aug 94 06:30:50 Subject: Your "Comment" Line Pvt -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In a message to all on Aug 13 94 at 00:13, Rebellious Guerrilla wrote: RG> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- RG> Version: 2.6a RG> Comment: Privacy... One of the Basic Human Rights! "THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS * * * "ARTICLE 12. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks." * * * Thought you would like to know. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.55 iQCVAgUBLk9S8UpSi8D+DhVtAQFYPQP/YUCGuscE25hne78dBMdltWwMt98780e4 dLndj9Xibkqv5lp0nfq1DJPrzlD9RjTq/UPszmr9s4KzoJG61FC0piR7sRVlRAQJ Jh3lqbYJZ+Dm6sqjr/UyvKwQMyA1JQ5PpjxtDh9OdBndsaXzNjlaBdAyJ+gS4uxB B6XmLwMt058= =+H0X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- GenMsg [UnRegistered] (mr@inns.omahug.org/mr@gonix.com) 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Shawn McMahon Area: Public Key Encryption To: jason carr 16 Aug 94 17:35:42 Subject: New to PGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Despite the stern warnings of the tribal elders, jason carr said this to Shawn McMahon: jc> That is correct: it is good form, imo, to ask permission before jc> doing anything that might agitate the mod. Did you netmail Chris to ask him if he was offended by abbreviations before you used "imo?" That's just as legitimate a target for objection as digital sigs. jc> There is not currently heated argument in Fido (and the courts) jc> about "gnarly." No one has testified to Congress about jc> "gnarly." There is no court case pending in which it is being claimed that digital sigs are illegal. There is no one testifying before Congress for them to make digital sigs legal. They are legal. Nobody with any credibility is proposing to make them illegal. The government is pushing for a bloody STANDARD on how to do them; obviously, they are in no danger of becoming illegal at any time in the near future. jc> i would ask before posting anything on someone else's corkboard. Did you netmail Chris to ask permission to post in this echo before you did? jc> That's not a directly transferable analogy. A better one might jc> be "attaching a poloroid of your self to your notes." It's a 100% transferable analogy, Jason, unless you know of a way to sign messages that is at least as difficult to forge as a print signature. jc> But the object of the game is not to be thrown out, but rather to jc> be a valuable and insightful participant in echomail jc> discussions. You can do that without signing your messages, Jason. You could even do that if it were illegal to sign them. Obviously, that is NOT the object. The object is to make allowing digital sigs the norm, instead of the reverse. If you take actions that entrench the opposition's position, you're part of the problem instead of part of the solution. jc> But I argue that it's bad form to behave in such a way that the jc> mod is forced to =make= a new rule. Nobody's forcing anybody to make a rule against allowing us to protect our rights by signing our messages, Jason. It's IMPOSSIBLE to behave in such a way that no moderator could possibly object to your posts, unless of course you don't post at all. jc> We need to convince the mods, not alienate jc> them. Indeed. And acting as if digital sigs are something special and extra will be certain to allow them to totally avoid the issue, and will entrench the position that digital sigs aren't allowed. If everyone who wants to protect his rights by signing his mail asks permission first, moderators will find it easy to say "no." If, on the other hand, everybody signs their mail, moderators will have to take the time and trouble to tell them "sorry, you have to quit doing that." Then they'll have to respond to "why?" Even if the answer is "because I said so, that's why" and the user responds "ok, it's your echo" it will still become a major pain in the ass for moderators to have to do this as more and more people respond to the endorsements of Scientific American, PC Magazine, Computer Shopper, the US Government, and others for digital signatures. Eventually, it'll be more trouble than it's worth and they'll stop it. Nobody will have done anything wrong, and the problem will go away. How could you be opposed to that? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLlD46ebJC2KuabptAQGbHAQAndGRAmq72YD6uDRqVLRSkpFmG2j6jmEN HI8RM23S7jvdfyICuf0f9TpaZ9nnEd7kNqeZkRS4dHiJun+XU3VosZTgTYTbGUKi 9t8aKuDIR6vEdnsmFyEbMZa5K8YzDai4l6jhZHEq5opsrIAWtdZYh61uuTYbhXnP HlygRFC0neo= =qW4J -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Jason Levine Area: Public Key Encryption To: Wes Landaker 15 Aug 94 23:13:00 Subject: Quick inquiry... WL> JL> Does anyone know what form of cryptology DISKREET (Norton WL> JL> Utilities) uses? I just realized that I've been using it (on and WL> JL> off) for a few years, without having any idea what kind of WL> JL> encryption scheme it uses... WL>It uses a (IMO) fairly weak DES method. I used to think it was really hot st WL>until I started getting into cryptography. =) And to think I used to RELY on it...I didn't think Norton would use DES. TTBOMK, it really is weak, compared to most other methods. *** OLX 2.1 TD Without freedom of inquiry a university cannot exist. 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: jason carr Area: Public Key Encryption To: Lloyd Warren 15 Aug 94 23:32:34 Subject: Message Signatures -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Lloyd Warren wrote in a message to Jason Carr: LW> I just wanted to point out a potential problem that I have LW> noticed (that doesn't occur here) that might ought to be LW> addressed in this echo. Actually, it does occur here (problem or not). My print is at the bottom of each signed post... LW> wrong, but as I understand the PGP system, this serves no LW> useful purpose other than verbal confirmation, and, may in LW> fact, weaken the system. Well, anyone with the key can view the print (that is why the voice verification works). At worst, the advertising of a key is pointless, as you =still= don't know it's the right key. At best, the easy availability of the print might stop someone from trying to generate a falsified key. IOW, if my print is famous, and my key on your ring differs, it's going to set off a red flag that would lead you to investigate further. It certainly =proves= nothing by itself. LW> Several of the echos I read have used the excuse LW> (although, IMO, invalid) that pgp signatures use excessive LW> message bandwith. Granted, the signature is an additional LW> overhead in the packets; but not as much as many of the LW> "cutesy" olr headers and trailers. Mine is stuffed in the tagline area, leading ellipses and all. You have brought up an interesting point: I hope we get some good input on it from the echo. jason ... Spam, spam, spam, spam, baked beans and spam. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLlBe/EjhGzlN9lCZAQHcQwP+ONoYWteKOgLvmRPncgevPybAKqnxfuTd leZqYrTLJjXxBfP1Bns+2uuE3Nj/swkSiKfhP4BFIAIvLhYcm95/n3nRxapddhFo ZUJDOSnwirIRHBHJcvtc8/1u71mqQkjHXMHlZZy7NfGRZvUB33s39Ltf9zLlgago dgbBghUd+LA= =xcL0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ...Key fingerprint = 60 97 B2 AE 7D 90 11 2F 05 1C 35 98 E9 B9 83 61 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: jason carr Area: Public Key Encryption To: Shawn McMahon 15 Aug 94 23:40:36 Subject: Net 106 still at it? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Shawn McMahon wrote in a message to jason carr: jc> NetMail, yes. Echomail is not addressed in P4. :( SM> Your copy of P4 must be defective, Jason. There are 26 SM> other technical purposes, any message, netmail or echomail, ^^^^^^^^ I think my memory was what was defective. :) Thanks for the correction. jason ... Anything you say will be misquoted & used against you. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLlBgiEjhGzlN9lCZAQH4dQP/aT1JzHWla/0edIf5gZV/hWRXhMdAFlHa +GThRtLTLkm/liwVJ3j9fThIHENtrjTn/Cwcf7JvF5LsQUwMwId85393dM63KKSf eZADG4RBqPOmYzVvdferr0+UuO/Pb0Ib5gX2L0/apS6SB4pCGplMuorD89uS1vms SJaFgrOFSek= =5uGn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ...Key fingerprint = 60 97 B2 AE 7D 90 11 2F 05 1C 35 98 E9 B9 83 61 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: jason carr Area: Public Key Encryption To: Shawn K. Quinn 16 Aug 94 00:04:30 Subject: New to PGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Shawn K. Quinn wrote in a message to Jerome Greene: SKQ> And I regard seven weeks of jail time and four and a half SKQ> months of boot camp as a waste of my time. Digital SKQ> signatures could have prevented 99.9% of the controversy SKQ> surrounding that incident. As it stands now we have no idea I saw the newspaper article on that one... Sorry 'bout that. SKQ> thing we know is it had my name in the "From:" field. And I SKQ> can't sign this one either because of the jerks that would SKQ> insist upon terminating my FidoNet access for being a twit. I don't understand. You can't digsign stuff in =this= echo? jason ... We have standards and expect you not to exceed them. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLlBlb0jhGzlN9lCZAQGjDgP6A8rl2p/rXmeAE9WpftzHBXEbJQoZrcXk hjm7HjMvUYTQohtXjdHhNAQDDb0WUMNlqt01lmDSZbUoZ3yxLAsBJ0UOca8xTKJO 4gFLSEt4BKtLh+SY8dYLEBD4obDkBWwMJ2xHTNVtZuRyx+6IhvGaoaKO3k+gcrh7 kYzRd+Qezlc= =Pes3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ...Key fingerprint = 60 97 B2 AE 7D 90 11 2F 05 1C 35 98 E9 B9 83 61 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Tim Devore Area: Public Key Encryption To: Scott Mills 15 Aug 94 23:13:02 Subject: PGP & Point Software In a message of 14 Aug 94 Scott Mills wrote to me: SM> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- SM> Thursday August 11 1994, Tim Devore writes to Tim Bradley: TB>>> iQBVAgUBLGf7jTDp94PCS+V9AQFtHAIAkUpQgXnMDgMzI8MtBwSp142DWRabgbwE TB>>> 9o8g2WZB4APE4uHyVdCS/eieZ72LWIuntZfZkOQoTNkIbSIpZLEkgg== =zkzt TB>>> -+---END PGP SIGNATURE-+--- TD>> How are you getting your messages signed like this. I've tried and TD>> wasn't able to figure it out and can't locate what I need in the TD>> numerous doc files. I want the actual commands. How do you examine a TD>> key on your secring? SM> pgp -sa +clearsig filename.txt will clearsign SM> pgp -kv secring.pgp will list all the id's in your secret ring. Thanks for the info above. I'll test it out and see if it works with my copy of pgp. I've done the above for the secring.pgp and it showed nothing was there and when I went to put something there it didn't find the secring.pgp file to put it in even though the secring and pubring are both in the same directory and I can put stuff onto the pubring with no problems. Any Ideas? SM> "If I shoot a mime, should I use a silencer?" - sw YES!! Even though I was in the Mime troup in High School. :) Tim Devore, Amiga Library-Op, Co-Sysop of Realm of Thought 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Tim Devore Area: Public Key Encryption To: Scott Mills 15 Aug 94 23:19:56 Subject: Net 106 still at it? In a message of 14 Aug 94 Scott Mills wrote to Richard Walker: SM> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- SM> Friday August 12 1994, Richard Walker writes to jason carr: RW>> No one has a right to tell another person that they must carry RW>> encrypted/signed traffic. SM> But to find that encrypted traffic the sysops must me reading all the SM> "private" net mail that goes through their systems. I could have sworn SM> that was against the law. Have you ever heard of a Key Word/Phrase Search? I can scan the body text in all the messages I recieve for any Key Words/Prases and it will then put all the messages that contain it/them and I would have a nice little listing for my viewing pleasure. It may take some time to get the listing on the different comps and setups but it can be done. No it's not "against the law" for the sysop to review any Net Mail. Find a copy of the Policy4 and read section 2 and it will fill you in on alot of stuff. Tim Devore, Amiga Library-Op, Co-Sysop of Realm of Thought 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Reed Darsey Area: Public Key Encryption To: Mike Riddle 12 Aug 94 03:34:54 Subject: Re: 2.3a vs 2.6 keys }Quoting Mike Riddle to Reed Darsey on 08 Aug 94 06:56:08{ RD>> So, my "2.3a" key is still "in" there, with a combination RD>> of my older and newer userids. Should I send a message MR> You want your revoked key to stay there as revoked, so the word that MR> it was revoked gets out. I've never revoked my key, just deleted and added some user IDs as my addresses changed. The effect I would want would be to have *just* the current IDs, as are in the current extraction of my key, in the key in the key server. It seems that whatever key server is being fed the Public_Keys echo always adds, so all my old IDs have simply accumulated. BTW, I enjoy your writings in the FidoNews. 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Ron Pritchett Area: Public Key Encryption To: All 16 Aug 94 21:26:14 Subject: Pres/Vice Pres -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Do Clinton & Gore really have PGP keys? I'm importing the latest batch of key from the internet server & I've seen at least a dozen keys signed by "Albert Gore " & "William J Clinton " For Example key David Carter (1024/76271099 1993/07/05) sig Albert Gore (DE09D78D 1994/08/12) sig William J Clinton (23BDC6F9 1994/08/12) ?*HOLY COW* I was just about to sign this msg & send it off when the mother of all ironies just popped up in my other OS/2 session: key Phil Zimmerman (1024/C7A966DD 1993/05/21) sig Albert Gore (DE09D78D 1994/08/12) sig William J Clinton (23BDC6F9 1994/08/12) highly doubtful, Ron -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQBVAgUBLlFpLq5NX2w997N9AQFBbAH/cBvvLqwlvgaKJ0QSzjftG+2vPecCJKzM tv53qssNxJgm4BwstWWR2yNFKLuWW+EWowahrl1TGY+i3V1v0WATGw== =Mf4p -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Ron Pritchett - 512/3DF7B37D Team OS/2 FingerPrint = D6 29 03 7A 26 3E 98 42 E7 5E CB F2 D6 7B BE 79 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Ron Pritchett Area: Public Key Encryption To: All 16 Aug 94 21:41:56 Subject: flub again -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- well it would seem that somehow I managed to delete my internet keying that I have for download. I grabbed the whole thing again. I'll make regular updates to it. I've had several people tell me that they really don't want to grab the whole thing @ once, so I'm gonna diving it into 13 parts (which is how it came from the pgp key sever into my mailbox). Sorry for those who have been looking to me for regular updates. I also must appologize for not having some magic filenames setup correctly in binkley. I've been busy latety with school & two jobs, but things are fixed now. For anyone interested, I'm gonna try to setup a PGP related web page when I find the time. Please e-mail me suggestions. Here's a summary of PGP related goodies available on my system: Pretty Good Privacy Data Encryption Available: 25 files (4353 KB) Newest: INETKRNG.Z13 8-16-94 (avail: 8-16-94) - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Filename Size Date Description - ------------ ----- --------- ------------------------------------------------ INETKRNG.Z01 150K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [01/13] INETKRNG.Z02 150K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [02/13] INETKRNG.Z03 149K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [03/13] INETKRNG.Z04 148K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [04/13] INETKRNG.Z05 147K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [05/13] INETKRNG.Z06 148K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [06/13] INETKRNG.Z07 147K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [07/13] INETKRNG.Z08 148K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [08/13] INETKRNG.Z09 149K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [09/13] INETKRNG.Z10 148K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [10/13] INETKRNG.Z11 149K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [11/13] INETKRNG.Z12 150K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [12/13] INETKRNG.Z13 81K 94-8-16* Complete Internet Keyring as of 94/08/14 [13/13] PGP23A_D.ZIP 201K 94-6-12 PGP v2.3a (DOS) PGP23A_L.TGZ 188K 94-3-07 PGP v2.3a (Linux) PGP23A_P.ZIP 323K 94-6-12 PGP v2.3a (OS/2) PGP23A_S.ZIP 535K 94-6-12 PGP v2.3a (Source) PGP26U_D.ZIP 212K 94-6-12 PGP v2.6ui (DOS) PGP26U_L.TGZ 202K 94-6-12 PGP v2.6ui (Linux) PGP26U_P.ZIP 213K 94-6-12 PGP v2.6ui (OS/2) PGP26U_S.ZIP 503K 94-6-12 PGP v2.6ui (Source) PGP_FAQ.ZIP 63K 94-7-06 PGP's Frequently Asked Questions PGP_KEY.RWP 1K 94-1-05 My Public PGP Key RSA_FAQ.ZIP 56K 94-7-06 RSA Encryption Methods FAQ TIMEDPGP.ZIP 4K 94-7-10 BTM for interfacing Qedit/timEd/PGP (updated) ^^I'm gonna try to spruce this up a bit RSN. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQBVAgUBLlFvda5NX2w997N9AQGrHwH/XuluZI1I0HrMlaq/Qr+RtclaoZ6EfuUy u9u5Uo2scegpz7MTrtYmGc26qXX1cdjFFGZbwejRSjTzuG5PwdU9vQ== =2eWY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Ron Pritchett - 512/3DF7B37D Team OS/2 FingerPrint = D6 29 03 7A 26 3E 98 42 E7 5E CB F2 D6 7B BE 79 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Brad Stiles Area: Public Key Encryption To: Scott Mills 16 Aug 94 15:15:00 Subject: Net 106 still at it? Hello Scott! RW>> No one has a right to tell another person that they must carry RW>> encrypted/signed traffic. SM> But to find that encrypted traffic the sysops must me reading all the SM> "private" net mail that goes through their systems. I could have sworn SM> that was against the law. What law would that be violating? Brad +++ PGP public key available - FReq PUBLIC_KEY 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Christopher Baker Area: Public Key Encryption To: Rodney Payne 17 Aug 94 00:34:34 Subject: Re: how does -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In a message dated: 14 Aug 94, Rodney Payne was quoted as saying: RP> Can someone expalin the process of making a token ring and adding RP> the keys and how do I get the public keys your keyring starts when you generate your first key pair. to add other keys, you just invoke PGP over the keyfile: pgp [keyfilename] and it prompts you for various input. to get public_keys, freq them from the sources, process them from the PKEY_DROP Echo, or pick up the Internet keyrings [massive]. you can also freq KEYRING from various folks for their personal public-keyrings. just don't certify a key you haven't personally obtained and verified. TTFN. Chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6a Comment: PGP 2.6 is LEGAL in Zone 1! So USE it! [grin] iQCVAgUBLlGTTcsQPBL4miT5AQGPegP8CAhMgJHSlLKJ7OvKNuk3YktOMjnTem+t iBFy2iULXQKp/DQm38Ye3RGSv0tzQD1m38R3CVYHue0XI4bV+5TS+Duy0VQtF4Fi RrTQaXcdGaezHBzURbXz9SLyrsNJa6V+rFgd6kuFpQyd0ydFUI7CG/8culPQ5vY6 Y2fuZG86JJw= =N2hl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Harry Bush Area: Public Key Encryption To: All 16 Aug 94 15:34:46 Subject: Hi! Hello All! This echo is now connected to Zone 2 Region 51 (Latvia) via R51SMH 2:5100/8 and to Region 50 via R50SMH 2:5026/3 . Best wishes, Harry Tuesday August 16 1994 15:34 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Alan Pugh Area: Public Key Encryption To: Christopher Baker 14 Aug 94 13:16:56 Subject: Re: pgpblue CB> In a message dated: 10 Aug 94, Alan Pugh was quoted as saying: AP> where can i download the latest version of pgpblue on a first time AP> caller basis? CB> right here. 407-383-1372. CB> PGPBLU25.ZIP or PGPBLOS2.ZIP which is 2.5 for OS/2. CB> TTFN. CB> Chris thanks, i got impatient and called the bluewave bbs. i didn't notice the os2 version though. i'll probably be picking it up after i get an os2 version of bluewave. i'm on dos again as i had to give up my really happening workstation at work because we have a shortage of equipment. i think i just need to get an hp-3000/70 minicomputer and put it in my garage. believe it or not they are cheaper than a good pc and were built from the ground up as multitaskers. as an additional benefit. they'll heat your house in the winter! amp ... What good ingredients, liberty and immigrants. TGAMP 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Shawn McMahon Area: Public Key Encryption To: Shawn K. Quinn 17 Aug 94 15:54:56 Subject: New to PGP Despite the stern warnings of the tribal elders, Shawn K. Quinn said this to Shawn McMahon: SKQ> Great idea. However, signing messages can get the people in high SKQ> ranks out here in "we don't want any cryptocrap"-land (i.e., SKQ> Houston, net 106) VERY pissed. So? It's their choice to get pissed. If they want to put every echo that allows digital sigs into an alternate distribution system, they can. They haven't done so yet, however, since there are more echoes that allow it than they know, including some VERY popular ones. SKQ> Great, but then you have the problem of attracting people into SKQ> that echo which covers the same topic versus an echo already SKQ> started. It's called the free market; if there are enough people who agree with you, they'll come. If there aren't, then you don't need an echo anyway. 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Shawn McMahon Area: Public Key Encryption To: Richard Walker 17 Aug 94 16:03:26 Subject: Re: New to PGP Despite the stern warnings of the tribal elders, Richard Walker said this to Shawn K. Quinn: RW> Not at all, as long as you don't utilize THEIR equipment to RW> transmit YOUR signed message. Richard, if they are worried about the contents of mail transferred through their systems, then they shouldn't volunteer to transfer the mail. Jim Dailey is refusing to pass signed netmail messages; that means he's reading Fidonet netmail that's not addressed to him, and diverting it. Guess what? That's a FELONY, as well as a Policy 4 violation. If you've been reading this echo, you've seen that people in the Justice Department agree with the felony status, and that police are being trained that it is true. What more do you want? A public statement from the President? 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Shawn McMahon Area: Public Key Encryption To: Daryl Turner 17 Aug 94 16:05:26 Subject: Re: Net 106 still at it? Despite the stern warnings of the tribal elders, Daryl Turner said this to Scott Mills: DT> sent to my downlinks. Please remember that FidoNet <> United DT> States of America. Houston, last I checked, was still in the USA, however. Notice the subject line, and notice whom the complaints concern in this thread. 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Shawn McMahon Area: Public Key Encryption To: Carl Hudkins 17 Aug 94 16:13:36 Subject: Question or two - Reply to a message originally in PKEY_DROP Despite the stern warnings of the tribal elders, Carl Hudkins said this to Shawn Mcmahon: CH> Well, we all know Policy4 has been overdue for revision CH> for some time now... :) Why the heck don't they go ahead CH> and do it? Because the control freaks are afraid that they'll lose power. Fidonet is run by a bunch of people who's ONLY power is over other Fidonetters. If they lose that, they're just normal folks. CH> SecureMail subset! It's safer for the individual SysOp, from CH> my understanding, if they have a personal policy of never CH> reviewing private mail, as that makes them not liable for CH> mail that may be passing through their system. That is what the lawyers have been telling us, over and over. But you can't make people pull their heads out if they don't want to. BTW, it's safer for the sysop if he doesn't read private mail, because it's a FELONY to do so in the US. How somebody thinks multiple routine felony counts protect their legal liability is beyond me. CH> If I ran a BBS, you can be damned sure I wouldn't peek at CH> people's mail, unless I had reason to suspect something in CH> its content was causing actual problems with the software. That's the only time US law allows you to read it. Any other time, you can get years in jail and huge fines, as well as losing many of your civil rights. Some of them never to be returned, no matter what you do. Did you know that, even if your state returns your right to vote after a felony conviction, nothing you do can ever return your right to own a gun? That someone like Jim Dailey is willing to risk the loss of his liberty, job, and civil rights, just so he can snoop on other people's mail if he wants, is completely beyond me. 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718