From: crunch@netcom.com (John Draper)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 01:01:11 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Lots of work to do.
Message-ID: <9211200857.AA02944@netcom2.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




I said earlier:

>>   I've been getting good support for my ideas on implementing machine
>>independent modules or "Libraries" of PGP routines that don't include
>>I/O portions,   but after looking at the code,   I see this is going to
>>take a lot of work,   both in organizing the effort,   and in implementing
>>the code.    Just how this is going to be done,  I'm not sure,   but this
>>is what cypherpunks is all about.    To hash these things over,  flame on
>>each other's ideas,  etc.

Miron says:

>It would be very nice if PGP behaved better as a UNIX filter.  For
>example, I'd like it to return an exit code if it fails.  I'd
>also like it to have a flag that disables any access to the tty
>for prompts.  For example, if I have an automatic  filter that
>tries to decrypt all incoming messages, I don't want it to prompt
>for a secret ring file when it can't decrypt something.

I say the folliwing:

The UNIX filter can certainly be written,   but it should use the
"services" of the PGP library code,  which might have functions 
specifically for use with UNIX,  But may not be called by Mac API's.
It's important for me to point out that these PGP routines as C
functions should be implemented as "Agents" or "Engines" and be
totally self contained and not be depending on UNIX, MacOS or other
facilities.   It is fair for UNIX programs to CALL them,   but the
PGP should not depend on UNIX,  or Machine dependent facilities other
than File IO.

Paul Rubin writes:

>Those of us who support the freedom to use cryptography, run PGP, and
>write whatever programs we wish (cryptographic and otherwise) should
>be aware that the boycott against Lotus and Apple is still on.  By
>making PGP run on Macintoshes and with Lotus Notes, we improve the
>usefulness of those systems and thereby help our enemies take away our
>rights.

I say --- Great!!  but I have invested a lot of my own finances into
purchasing my Mac II (Probably long before the boycott),  and I certainly
want to put it to good use.   This includes my rights to privacy and to
use PGP.   I don't like Apple's policy,  and think it sucks,  especially
if they dump hundreds of Mac programmers on the job marketplace,   but
sure don't want to ditch my Mac just because a few Apple FAT CATS made
bad decisions.   

David Clunie writes:

>2. A preliminary perusal of the code makes it obvious that extracting the
>   functionality from the interface is not an easy task.

I agree,  this isn't going to be easy,   SW development is NEVER easy,
so who is afraid of a little work?  With all those unemployed programmers
out there,  we should be able to get PLENTY of help!

JD