-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- To: geoff@commtouch.co.il, cypherpunks@toad.com Date: Tue Aug 27 17:29:43 1996

To: unicorn@schloss.li, cypherpunks@toad.com Date: Fri Aug 16 02:41:34 1996 Unicorn,

...

No, I was merely pointing out that if the review revealed that it had problems (one assumed that the intent of peer review is to reveal such problems in the first place, but perhaps you just like giving software away?) then the offered reward was valueless.

No, actually, after having pointed out one (and found another) bug in Pronto Secure, I find it to be an amazing piece of software! It does everything with PGP and although it's slow at adding new keys (I presume it always checks the signatures down a few levels every time it adds one, and thus justifiably slower then straight adding a key) it's fast, efficient, and fairly easy to use. I must admit that of the "View/Save/Inspect" options, only "Save" is very clear and the rest are (excuse the pun in advance) cryptic at best. However, the methods used for the cryptography seem to be sound and after monitoring my COM transmissions, I haven't had it sending my secret key ring out ... ;) ... (unless they're hiding it in tiny packets ;)

Peer review seems to have voted that their risk paid off.

My vote's in. Thanks for the software!

...

Cypherpunks is always getting the cash poor developer who thinks he very clever because he has to pay testers no money if he offers his new product free to the person who discovers a flaw, or writes a review.

I actually think that Commtouch will not be cash poor in a few months ...

...

From your home page, I would guess that you request that reviewers allow you to make their comments public. That's called an endorsement, and, by the way, people are usually paid for them. Sometimes in the millions. Think Michael Jordan is getting a deal when you use his name to promote your product and then give him a $99.00 piece of software (which is effectively worth the amount of time it takes to write a few kiss ass paragraphs on the software, not $99.00)?

That's because they're famous and their opinion is considered to be very good. I could see them paying Phil Zimmerman to endorse it publicly, but it wouldn't matter much because the mainstream people (the ones they're targetting with Pronto Secure) don't know who Zimmerman is ... so it's not worth they're money ...!

I venture that most c'punks would agree that moving strong e-mail security into mainstream is a good thing. This is not going to happen without people making money from it.

Definately... Message Copyright 1996, Michael T. Babcock http://www.cyberbeach.net/~mbabcock Send a message with the subject "Send public key" to receive an automatic reply with my public key. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: ascii Comment: http://www.cyberbeach.net/~mbabcock/PGP/ iQC1AgUBMiNo19tTCwP6TF2xAQHwUgUAlJGE5ZU0xV7Hx3u7+/MRv+n83Kn9ZxsE 8igHrEjLwVbfBC9ivoZ7aonm/misAdy2jr77oowPcvuE3t750oCMCfb+AdhUPQGx Knu29L4XNbgpUH+t5rCCqUiSM7EHIYtmURBjrmDSAADIH3vcd8b9Cc6T5soNIQK+ Nsy9hve+ly+4nVwujNKqAhOCvIMBn+wK/K+ifbAvGbXP65YQFktp4Q== =AF5P -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----