full-disclosure - PGP vs. certificate from Verisign

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAS3qdtlVw/EGax9x4678I58KAAAAQAAAAVqzH+EsGLUi2b9oKnDpddgEAAAAA@hotmail.com>
From: mountainfury at hotmail.com (Kamal Habayeb)
Subject: PGP vs. certificate from Verisign

Greetings,

I'm trying to get some expert opinions on which is better.  Using Outlook
2002, would it be better to use PGP to encrypt messages or use the built-in
option with a digital certificate from Verisign (or some other CA)?

Thanks,

Kamal