-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Anthony E. Greene wrote:
Isn't this what personal email accounts are for?
I'm not saying that the recipient's organisation doesn't have a right to
read their e-mail. I think everyone pretty much agrees on this point by
now. The system proposed by Adam allows this just as easily.
The only real problems I see with supporting "Recommended Secondary
Recipient" or "Required Secondary Recipient" are political, not
technical.
Have you read Adam's posts on this topic? I think he has presented a
very good technical case on why PGP's current implementation is less
secure than the one he has proposed.
Are we going to discuss the political implications of
including CMRK in Open-PGP on this list?
I think it is such an important topic that this is unavoidable. But as
Adam said, even without the politics, there are very good technical
reasons for not using the form of CMR that PGP has proposed.
Ian.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: Cryptix 2.2.2
iQCVAgUANEM3Y5pi0bQULdFRAQFTlwP/S814IkL165r2gY0/oYlE8n5nsljU6zxRLpfpUOl8Kisq
yWczGRie2Xv4G17APp6Cj/9+xFslFRBnuYl8VNn/WzB+VPgxGFW7aks4jxom50LVCyCsD42DEtVU
lk3t0I6UW6Euh51qOKoHP6MsARCP5QWZpn0P/MNjwoLr2z2VYFc=
=uqoI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----