From: Matthew James Gering <mgering@ecosystems.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 20:04:12 +0800
To: "'William H. Geiger III'" <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net>
Subject: RE: It's finally over (was Re: Explanation of Harald Fragner and  cypherpunks)
Message-ID: <33CCFE438B9DD01192E800A024C84A1928469C@mossbay.chaffeyhomes.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Yes, but you can't expect the masses sign all their email, not yet
anyway, so 
you cannot require cryptographic authentication for mailing lists and 
services subscriptions (esp. for-profit services that would not like to
turn 
away anyone).

That is what you are talking about isn't it?

	Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: William H. Geiger III [mailto:whgiii@invweb.net]

> >What we really need is an automated system that could 
> >authorize/deny an address prior to the code/password 
> >being sent that would keep track of distribution list 
> >addresses and such.
> 
> >Perhaps I'll create one myself soon.
> 
> PGP, Digital signatures, CA's, Authentication, ... This *is* a crypto
> related group isn't it?
> 
> How does Thwart, Verisign, or the other CA's handle 
> authentication of an e-mail address in there low level cert

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQA/AwUBNgBgOxU5HlNX4dnFEQKQSACghI+z9TK3uXdAbUQMfX2e+ksuk38An3s9
aV7TVzna/+S+cxFXrOmzoxOW
=n91J
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----