From: Ken Williams <jkwilli2@unity.ncsu.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 01:55:09 +0800
To: Breezy <ebresie@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: bugged?
In-Reply-To: <34EA2E43.240F2420@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.980218122312.17887B-100000@c00954-100lez.eos.ncsu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Tue, 17 Feb 1998, Breezy wrote:

>Babu Mengelepouti wrote:
>> 
>> Ken Williams wrote:
>> >
>> > I got pgp 5.0. which will not work with your version. Upgrade man :-)
>> 
>> He's the one who needs to change his version... to 2.6.x
>
>Why use 2.6.x vs 5.0?  Is 5.0 not as stable or something?  Not as good?
>What's up?
>
>====/------ Breezy ----------------------------/ 
>===/---- ebresie@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu ----------/ 
>==/---- http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~ebresie --/
>

PGP v2.6.2 for UNIX is RSA, and cannot decrypt anything crypted with 
PGP v5.x.  v5.0 for UNIX features the DSS/Diffie-Hellman algorithm that
all the other 5.x versions have.  v5.0 is stable, better, and is basically
the current standard.  it is more script-friendly and has a better
command-line.

basically, it really sucks when every encrypted message i have gotten in
the past week was encrypted with RSA/DSS and i couldn't decrypt it with
the v2.6.2 that is installed at work.  due to space limitations on my
volume server and our nihilistic copyrighted software policy, my only
solution/option at the moment is to bring my laptop to work just for
message decryption.

i've sent in a software request for a PGP upgrade on the network, but due
to the expensive PGP licensing agreements and the fact that we have close
to 50,000 active users, i don't expect anything to be done.

guess state employees don't have the right to privacy any more huh?
and neither do the studnets here for that matter...


TATTOOMAN

work disclaimer:  i lied and i'm legally insane.