-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 White Cat wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy Best! Jon

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Have you read the article in Wikipedia? Best, Jon White Cat wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Al Tally wrote: You can see the email, because I only signed it. Signing it verifies that I am who I say I am. NonvocalScream at WMF projects. The privacy aspect comes into play should I choose to encrypt my message. Masking an IP address is not a function of PGP. Best, Jon

I really do not see the point at all. - White Cat On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 2:13 AM, Jon <scream(a)datascreamer.com> wrote:

Yes, that is true. As has been explained by others, the privacy element comes in to play with encryption. For example, only NonvocalScream and myself (outside of the NSF, and probably including them too) will be able to decrypt the following message: -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.64 hQQOA5tRR7fEWjr2EA/7BQUb1Ck+dhJEe7fi0ph3vRYIVAGn0htZq6sdOuTwFU7Z BhdmX9i9IEIa784la/wshCX3N5D/nJZhEQDodNHlpA0x5qoXxhlez3/Da3rHvLiv Kl2TBFtcygVrvca0Q6T0757M+7GidWA/NGmMydvGylYNabVhNlfMQDf8g6EMoE0f jBqwCl+eiuEnWvmtdpxQexkndoVG/A1Y8UAcvEaHi2IFT03EMu6TqhoYnZuF1Qbu T9hnNwqBCqcokYk02ef7MK1AH8bWTm+ZfJ49S1pu183wqShwf9btEiqNgo9sQ7C8 1CLk2cBlcqlNxifNAWRM9AKLN+aOOcFa90W1b3rQjmYpW2ADiYMqlyyCYtbrZxxM RhmWGYuVqTdAHbyE7WwnQXm801nqqOvu8WBrFNTlw8Ay9QIODO0Lgk56Cf1iCG5P sDyjKePz2D3+TRNlLNAtcmIb0KZTn9y+MI+8nCSGUS6aiRakKhGsVT/X6crpP1En ae4ywurGti1j5+6J0CvqEjJa/He6TQAjU3ss+3RloRWWWfde5lUPK4S7X78J0ROk /Q644yWpjOWBw2OVnBoWjymtxr44x4pwgJitRnzgPv7DFw7xBWIjuIuGeF2wu97B bGaE3iC8b82KoOtthHp/DRjk/bTziw+gp6DxqrKuwe5jrkz5fi8WBfGiTQcDFYQQ ALgDbjsrBFDmhj3Gj6MOo7tAu6Y3yIhQm21zbaV6vOb7D0/XdlZ78bFqhSGf2u1V 6UY0xuYCFMvBj4NcVgzT7lWfAdNg+aLF2YDf9ED7Ql+UZz/J97Fj9MsBhrfj95VO lQIsHGNUDk3PT2PSyG6437L/7XHofOUg8SRmHqqa/awS7RJI14saU/aScJKxdiXZ QpPpLEsf95NmPhelu2L33MueHXaVJqJDO8aYWeblGaT2Xz8fByjpbq5vwXJgfkPD 0ik6fyLA5tIvuqrvGoiZPo9R8DHX6TeBb2PlF9hTWri+FiZDo51f2Nqm1TneyAhn DzguXVhPnh57GAtgZk2X/9VAPKGFsEX6tWLaE5J4rtgOLatNPGpGkUy4kgBmA2LH IMz2TUW3xf5LNHoG8IOpZP4EsuuSygxOLW6IAI2oWozEgBD1OMg5evii5hmIoI2b G/66VeT2xKRq/zNyVXc9qLU1HarZwZtdJvS4RdBT+Yg0K9rE789lTHlVK0szediw QO11o23304pES/8wz1XCBkspzf1N1kMDXA422s/R+BvsKgS09JHU30E1h5qhzXPn qkZww6R2nUl7AltUVDLPcjLMIM24wKEIL8v93P1wet5oIoDh19BbeUzjQOBb2+Sf 8z7ent89OXearmJUxAfNv4/Ob9WXYT8U58rN2e60n1a5hQIOA9aoHBlhvU2XEAgA yXUdGf8pzKHcCsF+SSli4t2tqzpAyvG4dCaJIiicRIl7Mq8c0urmvW886zk/+wSN 9/4Lo3uR8rCHbQrd5U0ZYGWsNTgyg/Yo1rb75BtgvVnvqvdTdlN+NEd98wbVicsy x8yY5XezjdafdvK+whHj2wjclDjxeRESmsUns1KCTC2vKcKCFRRpW//PmKYv52WH fuAHcNEEPpLuhPELkP8NSy8W3txckKwl/9eRlz+2eJd6xYX4sHnWfSpd5OKuir8K 8reaLdi9Gws0MyMDlB0hHZyk78BQt8xjJ24BETPSreefV5OVTI20tzepe08GYY1a BaQpl4g9GLhBlBFKQDvwtwf/V1kjRcuxMANUyBKC9ZbHivOvGVW0xZDuvxhe9mQT CfDhOJIBlu7l/6Xq/BmRTtGPouC9MarvbAwj81brd7qeN7t4dweJCwYX35OtY9Dx MUiBRDMmd1WA/xm2ljumEJo0WEkgXxColfyuRTy373Fdq3Mlfnbik+1UnzGkgui2 YewanB7iYgAk2sMIRtllxZ8WKvzha4DikTldBYuM7Jh7dPOvaDqeUnh4PdOgzSy/ 1nRPWM76DqSyHNdHrjfFoKuMla3aELB+oUBzT4btqMDKPcRkmIS+V0crKpH2WNcG Nx6sV1TK4asMlqxOW+CDbY/PoWbxVIg1y5PdOqlPafsuttKmARIJpKw0hLgn8GL3 XuL007VHqUc1OfY21Dwu94Rar0tiqqfSNeA33qtgJkszZhrqBXA3pwawObzEZF/n QT/z0yHbaG1xbI2j0MU8jO0lYnshMWtW5LyIGxcedNFEkJ6Af7aW2pX5PGNbl6OP zDGmKBMreNZezqhr3bKKGQVfgvk82agHgMYLFXQ/M7XBX2hIvu6bCx8kuP4yz/YF rKsUvyBrYMA76A== =h8/J -----END PGP MESSAGE----- That is the privacy element. As for identity, being that I have NVS's public key, I can confirm that only someone with control over his private key signed messages with the appropriate header and signature. Also, many people use gmail through an IMAP client such as Thunderbird, and they have the signature auto set. Personally, I use the web interface, which is why you do not always see my messages signed. However, for people who are involved with PGP, signing one's messages more often is a good way to confirm one's identity, because only the holder of the private key can accurately sign the message, and anyone with a PGP client can check that. Here's an example I came across just now for how PGP can help with identity: http://www.haltabuse.org/pgp/index.shtml I understand that it can look somewhat bizarre, but is it that much more annoying than 47-line long threads with 14 greater-than signs or a 25 line signature-cum-curriculam vitae :-) ? Thanks, --Avi On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 7:00 PM, White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko(a)gmail.com> wrote: en:User:Avraham ---- pub 1024D/785EA229 3/6/2007 Avi (Wikipedia-related) <aviwiki(a)gmail.com> Primary key fingerprint: D233 20E7 0697 C3BC 4445 7D45 CBA0 3F46 785E A229

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Avi wrote: ********* *BEGIN ENCRYPTED or SIGNED PART* ********* Hello World ********** *END ENCRYPTED or SIGNED PART* ********** That is what the message said in a decrypted state. Best, Jon

On Fri, 2008-05-30 at 00:15 -0500, Guettarda wrote: I'll take my PGP (GnuPG/...) signed/encrypted message thank you very much. KTC -- Experience is a good school but the fees are high. - Heinrich Heine

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Exactly, the signed messaegs are not about privacy, they are about non-repuditation, it is trivial to spoof sender information on an email, but using message digesting creates a signature that not only can other use to validate your message, but you can use to validate archives of it at a later time. In addition to authentication, this also provides for message integrity checking. As to the inline signing v.s. mime attachments, the former is much easier to deal with, though the attachments are less likely to get corrupted. [[en:user:xaosflux]] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Avi" <avi.wiki(a)gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 10:02 PM

2008/5/30 Chris Howie <cdhowie(a)gmail.com>om>: Yes, it's not like Gmail is popular or anything ... (I suggest a Gmail feature request.) - d.

2008/5/30 Chris Howie <cdhowie(a)gmail.com>om>: That'll be a *real* all your base belong to Google. On US-based servers! In the purview of FBI national security letters! Forget I said anything ... - d.

Can't you sign it with just a signature? That is, something which goes at the bottom of the email? The line at the top is completely pointless - if I care about whether or not an email is signed, I'll scroll down to the bottom where I would expect to find the signature. A correctly formatted signature can be hidden by most email clients, I believe, then you wouldn't be annoying anyone.

On 01/06/2008, John <compwhizii(a)gmail.com> wrote: I mean a PGP sig, but as an actual sig, not something at the top of the email that serves only to annoy people.