-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
__/ [ me@xxxxxxxxxxx ] on Sunday 16 July 2006 09:46 \__
> On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 08:29:41 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>__/ [ John DoH ] on Sunday 16 July 2006 03:55 \__
>>
>>> In article <jetib25k7cnn718618u2lc7glsg036ptlg@xxxxxxx>, me@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> There have been many instances of posts being made by trolls using my
>>>> addy turtill@xxxxxxxxxxx For some strange reason there are more than
>>>> usual today. My posts always have the same header as this one as I use
>>>> Individual Net News.
>>>
>>> But what about when you use datamas or other servers.
>>
>>Better use electronic signatures. I had imposters in the past -- ones that
>>posted from open relays and anonymous gateways in order to humiliate me.
>>Headers can easily be forged, so they cannot be trusted. There is no
>>substitute for something like PGP/PGP.
>
> And the chances of Turtill being able to understand something like
> this.........................................................nil.
It is not to be understood. The mail client or news reader
automatically hides it while interpreting the sequence.
Given your key, it is possible to say for certain if the
message was composed by you. It is flagged in the form of an
icon or some other notification type. There is no other way
which is reliable. That's what digital signatures are for.
Anybody who refuses to sign or encrypt is susceptable to
fraud through social engineering, e.g. someone contacts your
ISP or boss pretending to yourself, causing you trouble or
extracting key information like passwords.
Best wishes,
Roy
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEuiENU4xAY3RXLo4RAjSAAJ0QvWP+LZ59uXZKqU6i6lC8/ExuyQCgokNP
Ub1zDE4w2py5uXA7Da2Gnnw=
=bytx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
