Archive of ietf-openpgp, by thread

• Re: Conventional Encryption Keys, 5.3, (continued)
  • Re: Conventional Encryption Keys, 5.3, nospam-seesignature
    • Which is the preferred preference?, nospam-seesignature
      • Obvious (?) question about interoperability, nospam-seesignature
      • Why one pass sigs?, nospam-seesignature
      • Re: Obvious (?) question about interoperability, Jon Callas
      • Re: Obvious (?) question about interoperability, nospam-seesignature
      • Re: Obvious (?) question about interoperability, nospam-seesignature
  • Re: Conventional Encryption Keys, 5.3, Jon Callas
  • Re: Conventional Encryption Keys, 5.3, Hal Finney
    • Re: Conventional Encryption Keys, 5.3, nospam-seesignature
    • Conventional Encryption Keys, 5.3 - more notes, nospam-seesignature
• Re: More spec-ulations - update, Hal Finney
  • Nesting different signatures, nospam-seesignature
• MessageID wording paranoia, Thomas Roessler
  • Re: MessageID wording paranoia, Jon Callas
    • Re: MessageID wording paranoia, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: MessageID wording paranoia, William Lewis
      • Re: MessageID wording paranoia, Thomas Roessler
      • Re: MessageID wording paranoia, Jon Callas
      • Re: MessageID wording paranoia, Bill Stewart
    • More spec-ulations, nospam-seesignature
      • More spec-ulations - update, nospam-seesignature
      • Conventional Encryption Keys, 5.3, nospam-seesignature
      • Re: More spec-ulations, Jon Callas
      • Re: More spec-ulations, nospam-seesignature
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: MessageID wording paranoia, Hal Finney
  • Re: MessageID wording paranoia, Jon Callas
    • Re: MessageID wording paranoia, William H. Geiger III
• mail failed, returning to sender (fwd), Christopher Creutzig
• X.509 is not a product (was S/MIME winz), A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security
  • Multiple ASCII hash key?, nospam-seesignature
• Algorithms and specifiers, Jon Callas
  • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, William H. Geiger III
    • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Bill Stewart
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Bill Stewart
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Adam Back
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Bill Stewart
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Bill Frantz
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Jon Callas
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Jack Repenning
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, nospam-seesignature
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Bill Stewart
      • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Jack Repenning
    • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Black Unicorn
  • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, nospam-seesignature
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Jim Gillogly
    • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Adam Back
  • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Hal Finney
  • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, Jim Gillogly
  • Re: Algorithms and specifiers, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security
• Free toolkit?, Jon Callas
  • Re: Free toolkit?, nospam-seesignature
• Iterated-Salted S2Ks, Jon Callas
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Iterated-Salted S2Ks, Jim Gillogly
    • Re: Iterated-Salted S2Ks, Jon Callas
• Re: The spec is unconventional, Hal Finney
• [ANN] PowerMail 2.0b3 available, CTM Info
• Re: HAVAL - But which variant (and what OID?), Hal Finney
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: HAVAL - But which variant (and what OID?), Jim Gillogly
    • Re: HAVAL - But which variant (and what OID?), nospam-seesignature
    • Suggested addition, nospam-seesignature
      • 10.2 grammar (naked encrypted packets?), nospam-seesignature
• Re: Plaintext, symmertric algorithm 0 (9.2)?, Hal Finney
  • Re: Plaintext, symmertric algorithm 0 (9.2)?, Werner Koch
    • Re: Plaintext, symmertric algorithm 0 (9.2)?, nospam-seesignature
      • Re: Plaintext, symmertric algorithm 0 (9.2)?, Werner Koch
  • Re: Plaintext, symmertric algorithm 0 (9.2)?, nospam-seesignature
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Plaintext, symmertric algorithm 0 (9.2)?, Anonymous
    • Re: Plaintext, symmertric algorithm 0 (9.2)?, nospam-seesignature
  • Re: Plaintext, symmertric algorithm 0 (9.2)?, Christopher Creutzig
    • Re: Plaintext, symmertric algorithm 0 (9.2)?, nospam-seesignature
      • Re: Plaintext, symmertric algorithm 0 (9.2)?, Jack Repenning
• Fwd: 41st IETF-LOS ANGELES: OPENPGP, John W. Noerenberg
• Hashed signature material, Werner Koch
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Hashed signature material, Hal Finney
    • Re: Hashed signature material, nospam-seesignature
      • Re: Hashed signature material, nospam-seesignature
      • Conventional works, but pgpv needs armor, nospam-seesignature
      • opgp90a uploaded, nospam-seesignature
      • Re: opgp91 uploaded, nospam-seesignature
      • Signature packets without keyid?, nospam-seesignature
• I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-openpgp-formats-01.txt, Internet-Drafts
  • Blowfish? How do I set the key?, nospam-seesignature
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-openpgp-formats-01.txt, Anonymous
• New and wonderful algorithms, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security
  • Re: New and wonderful algorithms, Lutz Donnerhacke
    • Re: New and wonderful algorithms, Werner Koch
      • Re: New and wonderful algorithms, Lutz Donnerhacke
  • Plaintext, symmertric algorithm 0 (9.2)?, nospam-seesignature
• WG Meeting at LA??, William H. Geiger III
  • Re: WG Meeting at LA??, John W. Noerenberg
• OpenPGP and E-Mail Integration, William H. Geiger III
• draft-ietf-op-formats-01.txt, Jon Callas
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: draft-ietf-op-formats-01.txt, Lindsay Mathieson
    • Re: draft-ietf-op-formats-01.txt, nospam-seesignature
  • Re: draft-ietf-op-formats-01.txt, Hal Finney
• Draft, Algorithm, and packet updates, Jon Callas
• RFC 2015 problems, Thomas Roessler
  • Re: RFC 2015 problems, William H. Geiger III
• Proposal for new Attribute packet, Hal Finney
  • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Jack Repenning
  • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, William H. Geiger III
  • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Lutz Donnerhacke
    • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Jack Repenning
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Jon Callas
      • Export/Import (Was: Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet), William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Christopher Creutzig
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Jack Repenning
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Christopher Creutzig
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Jon Callas
  • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Bill Stewart
    • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Lutz Donnerhacke
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Hal Finney
    • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Jack Repenning
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Jon Callas
    • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Ryan Anderson
  • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Hal Finney
    • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Bill Stewart
  • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Will Price
    • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, William H. Geiger III
      • UserID Revocation, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: UserID Revocation, Christopher Creutzig
      • Re: UserID Revocation, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: UserID Revocation, William H. Geiger III
    • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Andrew Bromage
  • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Hal Finney
  • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Hal Finney
    • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, William H. Geiger III
  • Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet, Hal Finney
• S/MIME winz, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security
  • Re: S/MIME winz, Paul Hoffman / IMC
    • Re: S/MIME winz, William H. Geiger III
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: S/MIME winz, David P. Kemp
    • Re: S/MIME winz, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: S/MIME winz, Dave Crocker
      • Re: S/MIME winz, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: S/MIME winz, Paul Hoffman / IMC
  • Re: S/MIME winz, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security
    • Re: S/MIME winz, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: S/MIME winz, Bill Stewart
• Algorithm questions, Jon Callas
  • Re: Algorithm questions, Werner Koch
  • Re: Algorithm questions, William H. Geiger III
  • Re: Algorithm questions, Christopher Creutzig
    • Re: Algorithm questions, Tim Dierks
      • Re: Algorithm questions, Jon Callas
  • ciphercopia 0.98 - beta release of SSLeay based PGP library, nospam-seesignature
  • HAVAL - But which variant (and what OID?), nospam-seesignature
  • And on SAFER SK/128..., nospam-seesignature
    • Re: And on SAFER SK/128..., nospam-seesignature
    • Re: And on SAFER SK/128..., Uri Blumenthal
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Algorithm questions, Hal Finney
  • Re: Algorithm questions, Hal Finney
    • Re: Algorithm questions, Christopher Creutzig
• S/MIME wins, Lutz Donnerhacke
  • Re: S/MIME wins, Paul Hoffman / IMC
    • Re: S/MIME wins, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: S/MIME wins, Jon Callas
      • Re: S/MIME wins, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: S/MIME wins, Paul Hoffman / IMC
      • Re: S/MIME wins, Lutz Donnerhacke
  • Re: S/MIME wins, Andrew Bromage
    • Re: S/MIME wins, John W. Noerenberg
• Comment packets, Jon Callas
  • Re: Comment packets, William H. Geiger III
• Electronic Commerce Press Release, Robert Vinet
• PRZ style CFB mode description preferences, Adam Back
• Lutz formal spec / ROT-13 persists, Adam Back
  • Re: Lutz formal spec / ROT-13 persists, Werner Koch
    • non-standard CFB (Re: Lutz formal spec / ROT-13 persists), Adam Back
      • Re: non-standard CFB (Re: Lutz formal spec / ROT-13 persists), Jon Callas
  • Re: Lutz formal spec / ROT-13 persists, Black Unicorn
    • Re: Lutz formal spec / ROT-13 persists, Lutz Donnerhacke
  • Re: Lutz formal spec / ROT-13 persists, David Formosa
• Extension to packet lengths, Hal Finney
  • Re: Extension to packet lengths, Adam Back
    • Re: Extension to packet lengths, Lutz Donnerhacke
  • Re: Extension to packet lengths, Lutz Donnerhacke
  • Re: Extension to packet lengths, Bill Stewart
    • Re: Extension to packet lengths, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: Extension to packet lengths, Jon Callas
      • Re: Extension to packet lengths, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: Extension to packet lengths, Jon Callas
      • Modifications of 1991 necessary?, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: Modifications of 1991 necessary?, Jon Callas
• REMINDER: ISOC 1998 Network and Distributed Security Symposium, David M. Balenson
• REMINDER: ISOC 1998 Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, David M. Balenson
• Re: proposed edit (Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes), Jon Callas
  • Re: proposed edit (Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes), Adam Back
    • Re: proposed edit ARR, Lutz Donnerhacke
• announcing E-CARM, a new mailing list, Judie Mulholland
• Current version of formal draft, Lutz Donnerhacke
• Enterprise Security, Yahya Al-Salqan
• Formal Draft, Lutz Donnerhacke
• April 23-24:PGP Keysigning session..can one be arranged?, Robert Guerra
• Possible Error/Oversight in Encrypted Session Key Pkt format, Lindsay Mathieson
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Possible Error/Oversight in Encrypted Session Key Pkt format, Hal Finney
• Are You Happy!, vE0RQ1lEW
• SPKI in OpenPGP format, Vinnie Moscaritolo
  • Re: SPKI in OpenPGP format, Carl Ellison
    • Re: SPKI in OpenPGP format, Vinnie Moscaritolo
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: SPKI in OpenPGP format, William Allen Simpson
  • Re: SPKI in OpenPGP format, Vinnie Moscaritolo
• Please Fix, William H. Geiger III
• The canonical <CR><LF> in rfc2015, Hiroyuki Yamada
  • Re: The canonical <CR><LF> in rfc2015, Bill Stewart
    • Re: The canonical <CR><LF> in rfc2015, William H. Geiger III
• proposed FP sig subpacket type, Vinnie Moscaritolo
  • Re: proposed FP sig subpacket type, Lutz Donnerhacke
• OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, John W. Noerenberg
  • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, Hironobu Suzuki
    • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, Ulf Möller
      • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, Hironobu Suzuki
      • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, William H. Geiger III
      • MISTY1, Hironobu Suzuki
  • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, nospam-seesignature
  • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, Ian BROWN
    • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, Bill Stewart
      • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, Ian Brown
      • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, Ryan Anderson
      • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, Ian BROWN
      • proposed edit (Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes), Adam Back
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, Lindsay Mathieson
  • Re: OpenPGP WG meeting minutes, Hal Finney
• CyberNews, Il207y3z3
• Lost Messages, William H. Geiger III
• Re: Speculative Mode for KeyIDs of all zeroes, Hal Finney
• message integrity checksum?, Adam Back
  • Re: message integrity checksum?, Gary Howland
  • Re: message integrity checksum?, ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}
    • Re: message integrity checksum?, Adam Back
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: message integrity checksum?, Adam Back
• Key Extraction odd behavior ???, William H. Geiger III
  • Re: Key Extraction odd behavior ???, William H. Geiger III
    • Re: Key Extraction odd behavior ???, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Key Extraction odd behavior ???, Patrick Feisthammel
      • Re: Key Extraction odd behavior ???, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Key Extraction odd behavior ???, Patrick Feisthammel
      • Re: Key Extraction odd behavior ??? [Solved], William H. Geiger III
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Key Extraction odd behavior ???, Hal Finney
    • Re: Key Extraction odd behavior ???, William H. Geiger III
• section 4.3, William H. Geiger III
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: section 4.3, Hal Finney
    • Re: section 4.3, William H. Geiger III
  • Re: section 4.3, Hal Finney
    • Re: section 4.3, William H. Geiger III
    • OpenPGP IETF meeting -- what happened? (Re: section 4.3), Adam Back
      • Re: OpenPGP IETF meeting -- what happened? (Re: section 4.3), Bill Stewart
• Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Will Price
  • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, EKR
    • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Will Price
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, EKR
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Tom Weinstein
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Tom Weinstein
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Ben Laurie
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Anthony E. Greene
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Ned Freed
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Steve Schear
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Will Price
    • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Tom Weinstein
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Jeff Williams
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Will Price
    • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, EKR
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Will Price
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, EKR
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Anthony E. Greene
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Steve Schear
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, EKR
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Steve Schear
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, EKR
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Steve Schear
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, EKR
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Steve Schear
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Jeff Williams
      • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Steve Schear
    • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Adam Back
  • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security
  • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security
  • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security
    • Re: Proposed Extensions to TLS for OpenPGP, Curtis Yarvin
• G10: The Free PGP Replacement, Robert Guerra
• Where is the symmetric algorithm defined?, Lutz Donnerhacke
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Where is the symmetric algorithm defined?, Hal Finney
    • Re: Where is the symmetric algorithm defined?, Lutz Donnerhacke
• Improving resistance against attacks, Patrick Feisthammel
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Improving resistance against attacks, Myron Lewis
  • Re: Improving resistance against attacks, Rich Ankney
• Re: Possible attack on remailer keys?, Bill Stewart
• Re: Handling 8-bit cleartext signatures - a proposal (Was: Re: O, Maksim Otstavnov
• PGP 5 (i, source) question..., Rodney Thayer
  • Re: PGP 5 (i, source) question..., Tony Mione
  • Re: PGP 5 (i, source) question..., William H. Geiger III
• DSA and patents, Werner Koch
  • Re: DSA and patents, Jon Callas
    • Re: DSA and patents, Werner Koch
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: DSA and patents, Peter Gutmann
• co-chair resigns, Charles Breed
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: co-chair resigns, Lindsay Mathieson
• r.e. code fragments in the documents, Rodney Thayer
• We bulk Email for You, 6vc8eqq93
• PGP Inc. cleans off the KRAP, Peter Gutmann
• Lasers/Optics/Optical Tables - Save!, H1CAK5mNb
• More draft comments, Tony Mione
  • Re: More draft comments, Lutz Donnerhacke
• Re: DSS lengths, Peter Gutmann
• Discrete log signature key sizes, Hal Finney
  • Re: Discrete log signature key sizes, nospam-seesignature
• Fingerprints once again..., Thomas Roessler
• OP and pgp5.0i: some problems, Maksim Otstavnov
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: OP and pgp5.0i: some problems, Hal Finney
    • Re: OP and pgp5.0i: some problems, Maksim Otstavnov
      • Re: OP and pgp5.0i: some problems, Ian Brown
      • Re: OP and pgp5.0i: some problems, Maksim Otstavnov
      • Re: OP and pgp5.0i: some problems, Ian Brown
      • Re: OP and pgp5.0i: some problems, Maksim Otstavnov
      • Re: OP and pgp5.0i: some problems, Jon Callas
      • Handling 8-bit cleartext signatures - a proposal (Was: Re: OP an, Maksim Otstavnov
      • Re: Handling 8-bit cleartext signatures - a proposal (Was: Re: OP an, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: Handling 8-bit cleartext signatures - a proposal (Was: Re: O, Maksim Otstavnov
    • Re: OP and pgp5.0i: some problems, Lutz Donnerhacke
• Comments on current draft, Tony Mione
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Comments on current draft, Hal Finney
• PGP Implementor's survey : First results snapshot available, Tony Mione
• Comments on draft - Long., Bill Stewart
  • Re: Comments on draft - Long., stewarts
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Comments on draft - Long., Hal Finney
    • Speculative Mode for KeyIDs of all zeroes, Ian Grigg
      • Re: Speculative Mode for KeyIDs of all zeroes, Black Unicorn
      • Re: Speculative Mode for KeyIDs of all zeroes, Jonathan Wienke
      • Re: Speculative Mode for KeyIDs of all zeroes, Black Unicorn
      • Re: Speculative Mode for KeyIDs of all zeroes, William H. Geiger III
      • Re: Speculative Mode for KeyIDs of all zeroes, stewarts
      • Re: Speculative Mode for KeyIDs of all zeroes, Ian Grigg
      • Re: Speculative Mode for KeyIDs of all zeroes, Bill Stewart
      • Re: Speculative Mode for KeyIDs of all zeroes, Andrew Bromage
    • Re: Comments on draft - Long., Lutz Donnerhacke
  • Re: Comments on draft - Long., Peter Gutmann
    • Re: Comments on draft - Long., Bill Stewart
      • DSS lengths, Jon Callas
    • Re: Comments on draft - Long., William H. Geiger III
  • Re: Comments on draft - Long., Peter Gutmann
  • Re: Comments on draft - Long., Peter Gutmann
  • Re: Comments on draft - Long., Hal Finney
• What is going on?!?, William H. Geiger III
  • Re: What is going on?!? (FROM The CHAIR), John W. Noerenberg
    • Agenda for Monday's WG meeting, John W. Noerenberg
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: What is going on?!?, Tony Mione
    • Re: What is going on?!?, David Sternlight
• new algorithm identifier of the symmetric cryptosystem., Hironobu Suzuki
  • Re: new algorithm identifier of the symmetric cryptosystem., stewarts
  • Re: new algorithm identifier of the symmetric cryptosystem., Jon Callas
    • Re: new algorithm identifier of the symmetric cryptosystem., Ian Grigg
    • Re: new algorithm identifier of the symmetric cryptosystem., Hironobu Suzuki
      • Re: new algorithm identifier of the symmetric cryptosystem., Jon Callas
      • Re: new algorithm identifier of the symmetric cryptosystem., Robert Guerra
      • Re: new algorithm identifier of the symmetric cryptosystem., Jon Callas
      • Re: new algorithm identifier of the symmetric cryptosystem., Ian Grigg
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: new algorithm identifier of the symmetric cryptosystem., Hal
  • Re: new algorithm identifier of the symmetric cryptosystem., Peter Gutmann
• rhetoric, James Howard
• Sternlight, Secret Squirrel
• [LISTBIZ] A Point of Order, Dave Del Torto
  • Re: [LISTBIZ] A Point of Order, David Sternlight
    • Re: [LISTBIZ] A Point of Order, William H. Geiger III
• David, are you listening?, James Howard
  • Re: David, are you listening?, David Sternlight
• [no subject], Anonymous
• 25 Million S/MIME Users, Lindsay Mathieson
  • Re: 25 Million S/MIME Users, David Sternlight
• David, get stuffed., James Howard
  • Re: David, get stuffed., David Sternlight
    • Let it die (was: Re: David, get stuffed.), Chris Liljenstolpe
• Helpful, Mix
  • Re: Helpful, Black Unicorn
  • Re: Helpful, David Sternlight
• test56, Raviv
• Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Steve Crocker
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Colin Robbins
    • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, James M Galvin
• Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Steve Crocker
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Graham Klyne
• Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Gunther Schadow
  • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, David Sternlight
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Steve Crocker
  • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Gunther Schadow
    • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, David Sternlight
  • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Phillip M Hallam-Baker
  • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Phillip M Hallam-Baker
    • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, David Sternlight
      • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Antonio Mana Gomez
      • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, David Sternlight
  • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Alain Zahm
  • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, Sandy Murphy
  • Re: Why do people fight about S/MIME vs. PGP rather than use MOSS?, David P. Kemp
• PGP/MIME is not an alternative to ascii armor, Hal Finney
• Re: The Web of Trust Has No Clothes, David Sternlight
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: The Web of Trust Has No Clothes, Mark J. McArdle
    • Re: The Web of Trust Has No Clothes, David Sternlight
      • Re: The Web of Trust Has No Clothes, David Sternlight
• Long term contracts, Ian Grigg
  • Re: Long term contracts, Dave Crocker / IMC
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Long term contracts, Lindsay Mathieson
• Re: PGP/MIME2, Lindsay Mathieson
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: PGP/MIME2, Lindsay Mathieson
• Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Hal Finney
  • PGP/MIME2, Ian Brown
    • Re: PGP/MIME2, $B;3K\OBI'(B
      • Re: PGP/MIME2, Ian Brown
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Lindsay Mathieson
  • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Hal Finney
  • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Lindsay Mathieson
  • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Hal Finney
    • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Ned Freed
      • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Erik Seaberg
  • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Lindsay Mathieson
  • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Hal Finney
    • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Ian Brown
• PGP, MIME, and Armour, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security
• Critical bit (was: case for removing subpacket type 10), Hal Finney
• 103-microsecond 2048-bit verification on a Pentium-133, D. J. Bernstein
• V4 Fingerprints, Thomas Roessler
  • Re: V4 Fingerprints, Lutz Donnerhacke
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: V4 Fingerprints, Hal Finney
• The armour issue, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: The armour issue, Gavan Schneider
    • Re: The armour issue, Jon Callas
      • Re: The armour issue, Dave Crocker / IMC
      • expedience, consensus and editing, Adam Back
      • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Dave Crocker / IMC
      • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Adam Back
      • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Ian Grigg
      • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Ian Grigg
      • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Ryan Anderson
      • Re: expedience, consensus and editing, Bill Stewart
      • Re: The armour issue, Ian Brown
      • Re: The armour issue, Ian Grigg
      • Re: The armour issue, Bill Stewart
      • Re: The armour issue, Ian Grigg
      • Re: The armour issue, Ian Brown
  • Re: The armour issue, Paul Rarey
    • Re: The armour issue, Ian Brown
      • Features issues..., Jon Callas
      • Re: The armour issue, Dave Crocker / IMC
      • Re: The armour issue, Ian Grigg
      • Re: The armour issue, Bill Frantz
      • Re: The armour issue, Jonathan Wienke
      • Re: The armour issue, Dave Crocker / IMC
      • Re: The armour issue, Kent Crispin
      • Re: The armour issue, Kai Henningsen
  • Re: The armour issue, Hal Finney
    • Re: The armour issue, Ian Grigg
• PGP, evolving., Black Unicorn
  • Re: PGP, evolving., Ian Brown
• Re: Complexity not a dominant strategy for independant deployment, Hal Finney
  • Re: Complexity not a dominant strategy for independant deployment, Ian Grigg
    • Re: Complexity not a dominant strategy for independant deployment, nospam-seesignature
      • US participation in International Standards (was: Re: Complexity...), Ian Grigg
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Complexity not a dominant strategy for independant deployment, Hal Finney
    • Re: Complexity not a dominant strategy for independant deployment, nospam-seesignature
• PGP Implementor's survey, Tony Mione
• Re: MUST accept 32 bit lols everywhere?, Peter Gutmann
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: MUST accept 32 bit lols everywhere?, Hal Finney
• Sternlight Drivel, Will Price
• The web of trust has no clothes., David Sternlight
  • Re: The web of trust has no clothes., Ian Grigg
    • Re: The web of trust has no clothes., David Sternlight
  • Re: The web of trust has no clothes., Christopher Creutzig
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: The web of trust has no clothes., Hal Finney
  • Re: The web of trust has no clothes., David Sternlight
• expediency and avoidance of politics, Adam Back
  • Re: expediency and avoidance of politics, Ian Grigg
  • Re: expediency and avoidance of politics, Bill Stewart
    • Re: expediency and avoidance of politics, Ian Grigg
• Re: PGP 5.x will communicate with 2.6.x, Hal Finney
• Re: PGP evolving, improving, David Sternlight
  • Re: PGP evolving, improving, Ian Grigg
    • Re: PGP evolving, improving, Adam Back
    • Re: PGP evolving, improving, William H. Geiger III
  • Re: PGP evolving, improving, Adam Back
    • Re: PGP evolving, improving, Uri Blumenthal
      • Re: PGP evolving, improving, David Sternlight
      • Re: PGP evolving, improving, Adam Back
      • Re: PGP evolving, improving, Jeremey Barrett
      • Re: PGP evolving, improving, Uri Blumenthal

The web site for this mailing list is sponsored by the Internet Mail Consortium. If you have any suggestions for additions or corrections to this Web page, please send them to phoffman@imc.org.