On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 02:24:01PM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote: > On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 04:34:01PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > I think it is. It's trivial to create a mail message that vaguely looks > > like a PGP-signed message, and send out spam that way. There's no way to > > check whether a message has a valid PGP signature except for running gpg > > or pgp, which is much more CPU-intensive than adding a random text that > > has the look of a PGP signature. Implementing this is equal to creating > > a *very* easy DoS attack vector. > > Please stop with the FUD. This argument is laughable. Uhm. Which one of the above two gets the closest to FUD? The one with the one line saying that it is "laughable", with no further explanation, or the argument that took six lines to be written down, without the ability to trim it any further? Pot, kettle, black? That said, in the mean time, I've been convinced that the argument didn't make sense. Because of the other reply to my post. -- Wouter Verhelst Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org Nederlandstalige Linux-documentatie -- http://nl.linux.org "Stop breathing down my neck." "My breathing is merely a simulation." "So is my neck, stop it anyway!" -- Voyager's EMH versus the Prometheus' EMH, stardate 51462.
Description: Digital signature