-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Dave Crocker / IMC writes:
One more time, folks: If you are using the absence of MIME from some
current usage of email then you are using a fundamentally flawed argument.
MIME is being adopted. The rate of adoption (i.e., growth in use) is
proceeding nicely. We are not early in the process, so the assessment does
not represent fantasy.
I thought we were discussing PGP, not email. Last time I checked noone
has implemented file encryption, or encrypted archiving tools, or
remailers, or keyservers, or nym servers, or anything other than
email (and on occasion news) using MIME. Nor should they.
PGP is a powerful tool, used in many different ways. ONE of them is
vanilla email. ALL of them benefit from ASCII armoring. ASCII armoring
is essential to the survival of PGP and to the security of the "PGP
system", and the many systems built on top of it now and in the future.
If you are noting that some use of PGP is, or can be, outside of
environments that use MIME (i.e., not Internet mail and not the Web), then
you are right that they would have to add MIME support to work. What you
are missing is that MIME has become the standard way of solving such
packaging, labeling and protecting requirements for the net.
There is nothing wrong with PGP's having invented its own solution, at the
time that was done.
There is everything wrong with failing to switch to MIME use now.
One can implement MIME support without "switching to it". PGP/MIME is
good. PGP/MIME SHOULD be done. ASCII armor MUST be done.
Jeremey Barrett BlueMoney Software Corp.
Crypto, Ecash, Commerce Systems http://www.bluemoney.com/
PGP key fingerprint = 3B 42 1E D4 4B 17 0D 80 DC 59 6F 59 04 C3 83 64
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----