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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20030509194619.GC20013@cacr.caltech.edu>
From: gator at mail.cacr.caltech.edu (Anne Carasik)
Subject: PGP vs. certificate from Verisign

OpenPGP is free :) as are other implementations of PGP.

Paying VeriSign to create a digital certificate for you
is not worth it, considering most of the encryption you
run into in the wild is PGP keys.

-Anne


Kamal Habayeb grabbed a keyboard and typed...
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

-- 
              .-"".__."``".   Anne Carasik, System Administrator
 .-.--. _...' (/)   (/)   ``'   gator at cacr dot caltech dot edu 
(O/ O) \-'      ` -="""=.    ',  Center for Advanced Computing Research    
~`~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20030509/0aba5396/attachment.bin