[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Using PGP on Insecure Machines

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Using PGP on Insecure Machines
From: [email protected] (Paul Robichaux)
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 94 13:37:36 CDT
Cc: [email protected]
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "Ed Carp [Sysadmin]" at Aug 24, 94 8:54 am
Reply-To: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> At the risk of repeating myself, what's the problem with wrapping PGP in 
> a shell script?  Works for me - see a previous mailing, complete with 
> wrapper scripts.  I can send either encrypted or just signed email 
> without especially noticing it.

At the risk of repeating what Tim's said in the past, shellscript
wrappers are useless to people who use Macs, Windows/WinNT, and so on.

At the risk of repeating what Tim, Perry, and several others have
said, using PGP- with or without shell scripts- on a machine which you
do not physically control is also risky.

- -Paul

- -- 
Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG        |  Demand that your elected reps support the
[email protected]             |  Constitution, the whole Constitution, and
Not speaking for Intergraph.  |  nothing but the Constitution.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6

iQCVAgUBLluTZqfb4pLe9tolAQEUUAP9F3gnvVC3HXvx2lB8RZzJaS/xdSkbldqp
sH2WN0WdqZ/R+SJstCC1KL/Z4gd0fQAShIlyxG41pWkFVtQpCYXY4lR7ScX4/4/b
F78BcBHtz+2wIWq1CO0DnCxjOcgAZNvzhCzJUMr8l4AS2kfiMLh8r0uSUsq7jq93
vGNiBJu0+Ys=
=OQO0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Using PGP on Insecure Machines
  - From: [email protected] (Ed Carp [Sysadmin])

References:
- Re: Using PGP on Insecure Machines
  - From: [email protected] (Ed Carp [Sysadmin])

Prev by Date: Re: Using PGP on Insecure Machines
Next by Date: Surveying consumer demand for the info highway
Prev by thread: Re: Using PGP on Insecure Machines
Next by thread: Re: Using PGP on Insecure Machines
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread