full-disclosure - Signed e-mail vs. turning off HTML mail under XP

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]

From: lists at onryou.com (Cael Abal)
Subject: Signed e-mail vs. turning off HTML mail under
 XP

> Alas, the Continue button was just text, just as the tick box to not show me
> this help screen again was not there. This means I'll have to re-enable HTML
> mail, and wait for the next signed mail to arrive.....to turn it off. I
> wonder what will happen to messages that have been tampered with when I have
> turned off HTML mail? I will probably get a warning, but will not be able to
> go beyond that, since it is in ASCII and that does not (AFAIK) support nice
> buttons. So in order to enable signed mail, I will have to enable HTML in my
> mail....

Good evening Yossarian,

I'm sorry, do I understand correctly when you say that the mechanism for 
verifying / managing signed e-mail seemed to be included within the 
e-mail itself -- in html, no less?  Although I'm unfamiliar with 
certificate-based digitally-signed e-mail (I'm a pgp/gpg kind of guy) I 
can't help but be very suspicious.

Also, you mentioned that the machine will be used for business purposes 
and (directly?) connected to the internet.  Might I recommend against 
using OE for e-mail?  Mozilla Thunderbird is what I recommend for 
Microsoft folks.

take care,

Cael