Re: ViaCryptPGP 4.0?! (was Re: PGP integrated into Z-Mail)

Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU> writes:

> > And, what does this have to do with ViaCrypt PGP 4.0? Would it be 3.0 
> > compatible or is it something entirely different?
> 
> I dont know.  I dont work for ViaCrypt, and they have been fairly
> secretive in their work.  For all I know, they've made ViaCrypt PGP
> 4.0 completely incompatible with PGP 2.6.2 and PGP3.

I would have thought you and Colin would have some communication with 
Phil regarding PGP3, since PGP is his trademark.

The web page referred to it as being in beta, so maybe they are 
working with the old specs... could also be that they completely 
rewrote and improved on the old version.

(Of course if I have questions I should address them to ViaCrypt...)


 
Rob. 

---
Send a blank message with the subject "send pgp-key" (not in
quotes) to <WlkngOwl@unix.asb.com> for a copy of my PGP key.

> I would have thought you and Colin would have some communication with 
> Phil regarding PGP3, since PGP is his trademark.

Colin and I have been speaking to Phil.  That doesn't mean that I have
any idea what ViaCrypt is doing.  Perhaps Phil and ViaCrypt should
talk?  If there is a problem with ViaCrypt 4.0, it is between Phil and
ViaCrypt.

> The web page referred to it as being in beta, so maybe they are 
> working with the old specs... could also be that they completely 
> rewrote and improved on the old version.

I have nothing to do with ViaCrypt.  I dont know anything about their
products.  I don't know what they have or plan to have in their 4.0
version.  I dont know what spec they are using.  I dont know what new
data structures they have created.

-derek

On Wed, 28 Feb 1996, Deranged Mutant wrote:

> > 
> > I dont know.  I dont work for ViaCrypt, and they have been fairly
> > secretive in their work.  For all I know, they've made ViaCrypt PGP
> > 4.0 completely incompatible with PGP 2.6.2 and PGP3.
> 
> I would have thought you and Colin would have some communication with 
> Phil regarding PGP3, since PGP is his trademark.
> 

We're a beta tester for the ViaCrypt 4.0 product.  They have not made PGP 
4.0 incompatible with prior releases.  They've added some non-PGP 
features, like pseudo-key-escrow and key expiration dates, to make the 
product more palatable to some "corporate" users.  Many of the features 
are "localized" to that instance of PGP and don't actually inflict any 
changes onto the encrypted results.  I,E., making a key expire on a given 
day doesn't "break" the ability of others to read files from a PGP 4.0 user.

I also think that the comment about ViaCrypt being "secretive" is a 
little odd.  ViaCrypt tends to be very up-front about what they're up to 
(at least, they have been with us), and they openly solicit input as to 
'what features does PGP need to have in order to make it so you can use 
it in your business?'  Hence, they now have a Personal Edition and a 
Business Edition.

If folks have got specific things that they're worried about, I'll try to 
offer my observations about the beta product versus the "stock" product.  
However, I don't think that the perception that ViaCrypt's secretive 
about the "enhancements" is at all valid.

------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
|So, I went walking through the street.   |Mark Aldrich                 | 
|I saw you strung up in a tree.           |GRCI INFOSEC Engineering     | 
|A woman knelt there, said to me,         |maldrich@grci.com            | 
|Hold your tongue, man, hold your tongue. |MAldrich@dockmaster.ncsc.mil | 
|_______________________________________________________________________| 
|The author is PGP Empowered.  Public key at:  finger maldrich@grci.com |
|    The opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the author     | 
|         and my employer gets no credit for them whatsoever.           | 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------