Re: Program to circumvent the Sep 1 Legal Kludge part 1/5

On Tue, 23 Aug 1994 0x7CF5048D@nowhere wrote:

> This is a 5 part binary=noklg.zip
> Please make publicly available. put on BBS's, public ftp sites.
> part 1/5.

Can you please stop mailing me these unidentifyable, undecodable
files from a person I cannot identify, nor detect the reason for
the anonymity?

Maybe if there was an explanation as to why I should bother to play
with all this, I would understand. As my telepathy seems to not be
working right now, you'll have to write it in plain english (lame
monolanguage american).

Thanks.


PS: 

You misspelled 'cypherpunks' in the Reply-to field, which is where this 
seems to be going, and I'm sure my reply to the list will annoy everyone. 
Take it out on the anonymous bulk-mailer person.


 Tom Jennings -- tomj@wps.com -- World Power Systems --  San Francisco, Calif.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Tom Jennings <tomj@wps.com> Writes:

>
>Can you please stop mailing me these unidentifyable, undecodable
>files from a person I cannot identify, nor detect the reason for
>the anonymity?

Ok, I won't send that file anymore.

Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com> writes:

>
>I've been receiving these, too.  It seems to be a program which has the
>same effect as a one-line shell script to add the "+legal_kludge" option
>to the command line for PGP2.6, so that it generates backwards-compatible
>messages without violating anyone's license agreements.  

Well not exactly, because of a bug in pgp, the +legal_kludge=off
does not work by itself. What does work is
+CERT_DEPTH=0 +LEGAL_KLUDGE=OFF +CERT_DEPTH=4
Where 4 is the value that you actually want for CERT_DEPTH.
I did not want my program to change the behavior of pgp with
respect to CERT_DEPTH. So I had my program scan config.txt to
find the value there. It then sets the final value of CERT_DEPTH
to be the value found there. If no value can be found for CERT_DEPTH
then it uses pgp's hardcoded default which is 4.
>                                                         It's easy to
>do such a shell script in Unix.  
Which shell language? I understand that unix has several although I am
not a UNIX expert.
>                                 Is there a good way in DOS to add a few
>command-line arguments in front of the ones the user has supplied?
I wanted to have a program that could be drop in replaceable in
a dos environment. I wanted it to be possible to have existing pgp
shells continue to work with the SEPT 1 kludge disabled.
In DOS, there are common library  calls that only spawn
executables (.exe files) and do not spawn .bat files. The same is
true of OS/2. If any of the commonly avaiable pgp shells used these
calls, I wanted my program to be an executable so that it would
work as a replacement which would disabled the kludge.
I do not see how one could write a dos .bat file that could
scan config.txt for the users choice of CERT_DEPTH. If you could
do it, it would be sure to be slow. Some Dos users do not use
microsoft's command.com, so it is hard to see how a .bat file
could be fully portable in DOS.
>                                                                    If
>so that would seem easier (and smaller) to distribute.
>
>Hal
>
>


In short, I think my program could be useful to some people
who must send messages to people with old versions of pgp.
I wish that someone would make it available at an ftp site.

I won't send it out anymore and I am sorry I bothered you.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6

iQCVAgUBLl42Zw2Gnhl89QSNAQFgeQP9ESyltO1ilDje2WLrJxzgRU7M+AFE58aO
KgL3V9cFkRnkrqgW0Itj9adG3MV77OI8g5xlaQNnVuOD061ly5Yt6hsCMGj8VTIw
PLASysn84dsYqVItLD0+mCkLzO7Fw/PgJZ3rhJl+1v7AZZeluHaOSFH5egUs5S9X
OmX4e/RKV+Q=
=Ieoj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Tom Jennings <tomj@wps.com> writes:

>On Tue, 23 Aug 1994 0x7CF5048D@nowhere wrote:

>> This is a 5 part binary=noklg.zip
>> Please make publicly available. put on BBS's, public ftp sites.
>> part 1/5.

>Can you please stop mailing me these unidentifyable, undecodable
>files from a person I cannot identify, nor detect the reason for
>the anonymity?

I've been receiving these, too.  It seems to be a program which has the
same effect as a one-line shell script to add the "+legal_kludge" option
to the command line for PGP2.6, so that it generates backwards-compatible
messages without violating anyone's license agreements.  It's easy to
do such a shell script in Unix.  Is there a good way in DOS to add a few
command-line arguments in front of the ones the user has supplied?  If
so that would seem easier (and smaller) to distribute.

Hal