On mandatory sigs: I personally don't fathom the idea (as some of you do), I've always perceived PGP(Tm) as something I would use when I really had something sensitive to send a friend, or when I was making a public announcement to a mailing list or newsgroup. But to use it to sign EVERY single piece of mail I send to cypherpunks is asking a lot from me as my setup is very similar to Tim Mays', and I don't want to be singled out because of it! I think the list should proceed as it has since its formation, and subscribers should just sign their messages as they see fit. I know I'm not posting anything new, but considering the torrential flood of trash that Detweiler posted, it's not that much of a waste. :-)= Good evening.
Unbelievably, I don't think this old canard has come up yet in this discussion. I've always perceived PGP(Tm) as something I would use when I really had something sensitive to send a friend, If you encrypt only some messages and not others, every use of encryption will indicate that something significant is going on, which is a first class message of its own. Only if all messages to particular correspondents are encrypted do you reveal no information about importance. Encryption still has benefit here, but the argument that it should only be used when important has no merit. Eric
participants (2)
-
anonymous-remailer@shell.portal.com -
eric@remailer.net