On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 01:36:36AM +1100, Andrew Lau wrote: > On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 10:14:37PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > > ...encourage the widespread adoption of end-to-end cryptographic > > signatures in email. > > > > Nothing else is likely to have much impact. > Dear Steven, > In my opinion, this would make things worse. If the general > public embraced signed emails as commonly as they use Outlook, I'm > sure we'll encounter just as many viruses/trojans as we do > now. Except, that this time around, they would compromise the signing > application and passphrase/keys as well. The nightmare scenario would > be when these trojans start weakening the whole web of trust we > already have by signing other random keys maliciously. > All the more reason to keep GnuPG/PGP to those who know what > they're doing and why they need it. Well, by definition, I don't trust signatures from people who use Outlook as their primary mail client, so I don't think this will bother me any... -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpcIHEhK_GgJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature