PGP commandline (was: why PGP support exists in Enigmail)
Toxik - Fabian Rodriguez
Wed Nov 13 15:31:02 2002
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
(I thought I'd share this with gnupg-users)
>> PGP command line is very well and alive, but as part of McAfee
>> Security: http://www.mcafeeb2b.com/products/ebusiness.asp
> As I understand the position, NAI did not sell off the rights to
> commandline version, as they wished to retain the rights for some
> business applications using their E-Business servers. However,
> has been no commandline version of PGP from PGP 7.x onwards
Correct. This is what the press releases at pgp.com say. See:
> and neither
> McAfee nor NAI are planning on releasing any more versions to the
> general public
To my knowledge, there hasn't been an official statement about this,
but one could presume that as GnuPG and other OpenPGP tools evolve,
so will NAI's (BTW, McAfee is a NAI company, or should I say NAT ->
Network Associates Technology). For a brief history of OpenPGP:
> and the PGP Corporation says it does not intend to
> release any commandline versions.
They don't have to, command-line is not theirs anyways. They are
strictly working on client products and admin tools for those
products, as I see it.
> In any case, why use a commandline PGP when you have a much more
> and up-to-date commandline GnuPG which meets with the OpenPGP
The fact it costs U$15K (lifetime licence) is another reason. But
price is not an issue for big organizations (*in their own words*).
BTW, which "high-profile" organizations use GnuPG as part of their
daily operations ? I'd love to have some examples to support our
choice of GnuPG in our projects.
Fabián Rodríguez - Toxik Technologies, Inc.
www.toxik.com - (514) 528-6945 @221
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (MingW32) - WinPT 0.5.12
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----