-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Message-Signature-Date: Fri Jun 21 10:14:59 1996
From: geoff@commtouch.co.il (geoff) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 12:03:48 +0300
The signature on the message attached below did not verify.
Please let me know if people agree that this would be a useful service, or is it inappropriate ?
I use a lisp package for emacs that I wrote to automatically verify signatures on incoming mail, so I already see the 10% of messages which are improperly signed displayed in a red "bad signature" font. Thus, I'd have no need of this service. Further, it makes philisophical/political sense to me to have verification distributed. Every node should be doing it's own security. Be aware of CC's before replying to this. - -- TJIC (Travis J.I. Corcoran) http://www.openmarket.com/personal/tjic/index.html Member EFF, GOAL, NRA. opinions (TJIC) != opinions (employer (TJIC)) "Buy a rifle, encrypt your data, and wait for the Revolution!" PGP encrypted mail preferred. Ask me about dragbar-time.el for emacs. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Auto-signed by mail-secure.el 1.006 using mailcrypt Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.3, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAwUBMcqubYJYfGX+MQb5AQFP5AQAzrePx1jhIfE/iHT0abqvOPQxpQ795/vk CEJBSNLM91S3tSFXtcTvqYWRvE8BksT6l4JqwVhmDWN8U3UV60pJVqbwoLbH3bvs fQcPT+HxvFDknrVIvQibwpOB9Pw9PCyV1mfMkyOjsJzRTCJe7XiFT7TS0bZA+VvX Ls0Jpjozvnk= =0x7g -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----