RE: My every present GPG signature...

["Richard Klappal" <klappal@xnet.com>]

I'm running on a Windows 2000 system, using MS Outlook as a mail handler
(after going thru several layers of spam/virus filtering) and have no
problems with your mails. Outlook tags them as having a security attachment,
the same as when I used to use a Verisign ID.

I think I installed the PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) system on my system but
never got around to actually activating it.  Maybe I should.

Leave your security systems enabled.

Rich


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-tass@listserv.wwa.com [mailto:owner-tass@listserv.wwa.com]On
Behalf Of Robert Creager
Sent: Monday, 23 August, 2004 22:04
To: TASS
Subject: My every present GPG signature...



Hey All,

I've been approached off list by a member of the list with the thought that
my
GPG signature may be causing some people problems (size/attachment).

This person did not know what the GPG signature was, so I pointed to a
couple of
spots: http://fortytwo.ch/gpg/intro for a quick description, and
http://www.gnupg.org/gph/en/manual.html for more in depth information.

But, I figured I'd float out the question and see if others have opinions
about
the GPG signature on my e-mails.

I sign my e-mails because: "The attachments are a digital signature attached
to
every message I send so people who want to can verify that I sent them.  I
do
this because my domain is spoofed (lots of spam being sent, with the
apparent
return of logicalchaos.org)."

The attachments are 198 bytes (should be attached to this e-mail), which is
not
much, but the attachment itself may be causing some problems that I am
unaware
of.

So, I'm willing to try to remember to stop attaching them (it's automatic,
and I
won't turn it off) if enough folks say 'stop it' ;-)

Either let me know off list or on, makes no difference to me.

Cheers,
Rob

--
 20:54:50 up 9 days,  7:17,  3 users,  load average: 2.12, 2.11, 2.17
Linux 2.6.5-02 #8 SMP Mon Jul 12 21:34:44 MDT 2004