Mark M. Wrote:
Is it because most mail programs are not PGP aware?
I don't know of any mail programs that can use PGP (I know there are various interfaces, sendmail wrappers, and other hacks, but I have yet to see a mailer with an "Encrypt" or "Sign" option.
Once upon a time last year or the year before, Tim May posted why he doesn't use PGP very often. And I have always stood by that same sentiment. Yes, it is a good encryption product, but it is not integrated seamlessly into other applications. Tim, feel free to whack me if you think I'm speaking for you. If, as cypherpunks, we want to spread the use of strong crypto, we need to have a better interface than what currently exists on PGP 2.6.2. I'm sure Derek and the other guys on PGPlib will make it easier to integrate into applications. Am I just blowing smoke, Mr. Atkins? PGP is a pain for encrypting or signing e-mail when you have to save your message out to a temp file, encrypt it, and load it back in to your mail package. Sure, there are things like Private Idaho, which I use on occasion. But, it is still a seperate application that just doesn't fit seamlessly into most applications. In my free time, I have been playing around with add ons for Microsoft Exchange. I've got an OLE 2.0 encryption object that embeds nicely into an Exchange message. I haven't tied it in to PGP yet, because I have been waiting for the release of PGPlib. However, that will allow at least some seamless integration. Brad Shantz TRIsource Windows Development Services