1997-10-08 - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5?
Header Data
From: Mike <Michael.Johnson@mejl.com>
To: Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
Message Hash: 0ef550de32542e97415ad875a4b66c380d9dc03c95fe86903a6a3b9c1e56775d
Message ID: <3.0.3.32.19971008144658.00929840@localhost>
Reply To: <3.0.3.32.19971007142710.00a22970@mail.pgp.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-08 12:56:39 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 20:56:39 +0800
Raw message
From: Mike <Michael.Johnson@mejl.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 20:56:39 +0800
To: Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
Subject: Re: What's really in PGP 5.5?
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19971007142710.00a22970@mail.pgp.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971008144658.00929840@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Jon Callas wrote:
>To sum up, we created the Corporate Mesage Recovery feature to satisfy the
>requirements of our customers who need emergency access to data. We made
>careful decisions to make it useful and effective for honest people, while
>minimizing its potential for abuse. No one has to use it; we do not include
>it with PGP freeware, nor with PGP for Personal Privacy.
What happens when the non corporate versions of PGP encrypts a message to
Alice? Will they disregard the recovery key and encrypt to Bob, or simply
fail?
Mike.
Thread
Return to October 1997
- Return to “Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>”
- Return to “Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>”
- Return to “Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>”
- Return to “Charles Platt <cp@panix.com>”
- Return to ““John W. Noerenberg” <jwn2@qualcomm.com>”
- Return to “Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>”
- Return to “lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)”
- Return to “Mike <Michael.Johnson@mejl.com>”
- Return to “Paul Pomes <ppomes@Qualcomm.com>”
- Return to “The Prosecutor <tp@dev.null>”
- Return to “Tim May <tcmay@got.net>”
Return to ““William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@invweb.net>”
- 1997-10-07 (Wed, 8 Oct 1997 05:44:17 +0800) - What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
- 1997-10-08 (Wed, 8 Oct 1997 11:42:36 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Charles Platt <cp@panix.com>
- 1997-10-08 (Wed, 8 Oct 1997 13:07:14 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
- 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 01:22:09 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
- 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 02:40:01 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - “William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@invweb.net>
- 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 06:55:48 +0800) - access to storage keys, NOT comms keys! (Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5?) - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
- 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 02:40:01 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - “William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@invweb.net>
- 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 01:22:09 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
- 1997-10-08 (Wed, 8 Oct 1997 20:56:39 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Mike <Michael.Johnson@mejl.com>
- 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 01:22:18 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
- 1997-10-10 (Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:58:04 +0800) - Corporate Access to Keys (CAK) Considered Harmful - Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
- 1997-10-10 (Sat, 11 Oct 1997 04:19:39 +0800) - Re: Corporate Access to Keys (CAK) Considered Harmful - Paul Pomes <ppomes@Qualcomm.com>
- 1997-10-10 (Sat, 11 Oct 1997 01:56:46 +0800) - Re: Corporate Access to Keys (CAK) Considered Harmful - The Prosecutor <tp@dev.null>
- 1997-10-10 (Sat, 11 Oct 1997 00:58:04 +0800) - Corporate Access to Keys (CAK) Considered Harmful - Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
- 1997-10-08 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 07:27:31 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
- 1997-10-09 (Thu, 9 Oct 1997 12:45:06 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
- 1997-10-09 (Fri, 10 Oct 1997 02:39:33 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
- 1997-10-10 (Fri, 10 Oct 1997 14:57:35 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - “John W. Noerenberg” <jwn2@qualcomm.com>
- 1997-10-10 (Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:24:06 +0800) - do NOT escrow communications keys (Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5?) - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
- 1997-10-13 (Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:06:53 +0800) - Re: Corporate Access to Keys (CAK) Considered Harmful - Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
- 1997-10-10 (Fri, 10 Oct 1997 19:11:54 +0800) - Re: What’s really in PGP 5.5? - lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)