Mark Henderson wrote:
I've heard this rumour before.
I didnt hear any rumor or anything. It just makes sense to me to be paranoid like Mr. Zimmerman said. Besides, my uncles friends write cryptagraphy for government guys and big businesses and they mostly use 2.1 and 2.3 instead of the stuff they write. They say the code for the new stuff (PGP) is ok but there are too many funny-stuff programs being written that mess with it but that nobody is bothering to write funny-stuff to mess with the old versions. They say the same thing about their own stuff that they are writing.
Of course, feel free not to trust what I say. You can look at the source code yourself. But from what I've seen, you'll be better off with the latest version.
I cant read code real good, so i just listen to the best guys I know to know how paraniod to be.
The world is a strange and dangerous place.
"No shit, Sherlock!" Thats what we say on my lists when people say stuff that nobody should forget. I think a lot of the cypherpunks forgot the stuff that they put at the end of their messages since they dont do it. Thanks for writing me. Your polite and helpful. Mutatis Mutantdis wrote:> Well, start thinking.... My uncle says I must be a cryptagrapher because I think in random umbers. Then he laughs. Marcus Butler wrote: If you are going to be that paranoid about things, you should not use anything you did not write yourself, afterall, even the cypherpunks list could be an elaborate government scheme to lull people into using PGP and similar technologies (JJ). I dont write good code yet. My uncle and his friends say that the government guys couldnt ever do what they wanted with the cypherpunks because of the shit-disturbers on the list but that the big business guys who want to own the list to themselves will do what the government guys couldnt do. (They ought to know cause some of them are the government guys who watch the cypherpunks. I know cause they let me drink Scotch with them.)