Full Disclosure mailing list archives
RE: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam!
From: Steve Wray <steve.wray () paradise net nz>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:50:34 +1300
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com] On Behalf Of onedo () gmx net I had to notice something today that really disturbed me. A friend of mine(working for a very big company) complained, that she doesn't get any mails from me anymore. It turned out, that apparently
my
mails went straight into the spam filter, as I signed everyone of
them. When I
sent unsigned mails, she got them. What do we learn? Crypto is bad
m'kay?
But for real, does that mean that we won't be able to sign any mails anymore soon, due to the spam problem(and stupid admins)?
About... oh 3 maybe 4 months ago I think... I recently encountered a similar problem where an ISP silently implemented "drop all the pgp signed or encrypted email and don't tell anyone" policy. For corporate customers. We detected it because we use encryption a fair bit so when people don't get emails they notice. The wierdest thing was that they were not just filtering out MIME attached PGP signatures and messages; they were filtering out email that had ASCII armored PGP in the body of the email. There was no attachment. The ISPs line was that they basically admitted incompetence "An upgrade to the software set these defaults" and the 'feature' was turned off; for people that *asked* for it to be turned off. IIRC, they actually tried to charge a (not insignificant) fee to do so.
'EGovernment' is the big word everywhere nowadays. The electronic signature is mentioned as a way to ensure the credidibility
of sender and
receiver. Now what?
PGP is an unregulated system for something that is a governments 'stock in trade'; the verification and identity of individuals. They issue passports and construct electoral rolls. I think that they'd like to do it *their* way and regulate it. Otherwise who knows? Think of the children.
Guys(and girls), the situation sucks. What do you think? And, most important of all, do you see any way to fight this behaviour? Because honestly, I don't. Greets $me _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam!, (continued)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Nick FitzGerald (Nov 12)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Michael Gale (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Scott Taylor (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Michael Gale (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Daniel (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Michael Gale (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Steffen Kluge (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Michael Gale (Nov 11)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Chris Ruvolo (Nov 12)
- Re: PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! onedo (Nov 12)
- Re: PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Shawn McMahon (Nov 13)
- Re: a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam! Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 12)