E-Mail Encryption: Why Isn't Everyone Doing It?

[Anthony E. Greene]

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

On 25-Oct-2002/12:34 +0100, Graham <graham.todd@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>On Friday 25 Oct 2002 10:26 am, David Pic=F3n =C1lvarez wrote:
>
>[snipped]
>
>> Obviously, everyone has the right to use whatever software they
>> prefer and in whatever manner. I just think that: 1) spending gnupg's
>> developers time in a GUI wouldn't be optimum resource allocation. 2)
>> a gui may not be the best thing from a security standpoint. 3) I
>> don't believe creating a gnupg gui for unix would increase its user
>> base.
>>
>> Anyway, I don't want to seem fanatical or something. :-)
>
>I'm not asking that gnupg developers spend their time on a GUI for GPG. =
=20

Actually in this archived message

  http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2002-October/015575.html

you said:

"Surely its not beyond the expertise of those who produce such a=20
brilliant program an GnuPG to provide a GUI interface through which ALL=20
commands can be given and which (in Linux anyway) can be used as a=20
stand alone program to encrypt or sign emails even in MUAs without GPG=20
integration?"

There's always the possibility of a misunderstanding, but it looks pretty
much like you'd like the GnuPG developers to also develop a GUI for GnuPG.

In the interest of fairness, I'd like to make note of the fact that later
in the thread you volunteered to work with someone (not a GnuPG developer=
)
on designing such a GUI.

Tony
- --=20
Anthony E. Greene <mailto:agreene@pobox.com>
OpenPGP Key: 0x6C94239D/7B3D BD7D 7D91 1B44 BA26  C484 A42A 60DD 6C94 239=
D
AOL/Yahoo Chat: TonyG05      HomePage: <http://www.pobox.com/~agreene/>
Linux: the choice of a GNU Generation. <http://www.linux.org/>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Anthony E. Greene 0x6C94239D <agreene@pobox.com>

iD8DBQE9uWixpCpg3WyUI50RAmbqAKD2ovrz57hcx8sZ6M0pfe1DjIhJOACfaFYP
xIShprFfLYCmBSpUd5G+/KQ=3D
=3DU9UA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----