Frontends for Windows
Mon Nov 19 14:18:01 2001
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Selon Arild Bjork :=20
> It's free enough for me. The license to GPGshell states:
> LIMITATIONS ON REVERSE ENGINEERING, DECOMPILATION, AND
> You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble "THE
> SOFTWARE", except and only to the extent that such activity is
> expressly permitted by applicable law notwithstanding this
> But if the GnuPG teams can't accept it, well it's their problem. I believe
> GnuPG will have a much harder time gaining acceptance without a decent
It seems you haven't understood the underlying problem.
The question is : why did you decide to use GnuPG ? To improve your
security, I imagine, as most people here did.=20
However, using such a program, especially under this freeware kind of
license, is clearly a security problem, as many people have already told
you. I also agree that GPGshell must not contain any backdoor, but
precisely you make your system security rely entirely on this asumption.
Even if this is a bug, the passphrase is at some moment within the
program memory, and who knows what is done of it then ?
There are a lot of ways a program can send data over the internet by any
mean, I'm quite sure this can be easily feasible, especially under
Your opinion is that this program is good for GnuPG for it provides a
user-friendly interface, even if its source code is closed.
My opinion is you don't deserve to use GnuPG.
### Lo=EFc Bernable aka Leto -- firstname.lastname@example.org -- Parinux, April, LinuxFR #=
Si Dieu existait, il faudrait s'en d=E9barasser
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----