-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dan C <youmustbejoking@invalid.lan> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 22:03:37 -0700, BenneJezzerette wrote:
>
>>>>... the reasons for PGP is to show, the e-mail sent is from the actual
>>>>person sending it.
>
>>> This isn't email. This is Usenet.
>
>> No! Really!!!??? and to think, (sarcasm abounds) if you didn't say it, I
>> would never have known!! Not!!
>
> So why do you explain the use of PGP on Usenet by saying what you said
> above? You said "the email is sent...". Email is different than these
> posts on Usenet, genius. Do you even know why you think you need to use
> PGP on Usenet?
>

See the reason why this thread was even started. If you didn't
know that the real Alan Hicks didn't use PGP for his messages, how
would you be able to tell his posts from rm? How would you be able to
tell who was who? With PGP, regardless of where it is posted, emailed,
transferred, or otherwise, I could go to a keyserver, find Alan's
public key, and check the signature of his message against his key. If
they match, I know that it was really Alan Hicks who wrote the message.
That sort of thing is hard to fake (unless you have 10^6 years to try
to get one key hacked right for one message).

PGP isn't only used for email anymore.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email: tyketto@sbcglobal.net
Unix Systems Administrator, | tyketto@ozemail.com.au
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.sbcglobal.net/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFClKY9yBkZmuMZ8L8RAv3xAKDcaZgjwbChK4hnThGWE3 povcBFSACg8Ew5
nw4f+xrwroy8hXKCZHImios=
=Krl2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----