Re: Freeware version of 8.1
Casey Klc
this}@hotmail.com says...
> I purchased 8.1 from PGP corp for $59 in 2004 and have been using it
> (minimally) without problem. I don't see any need to upgrade to v9.
> But a friend wants to use the freeware version and doesn't need
> anything but the basic uses, so I tried to get it from the PGP
> International website, where they list version 8.0.6 as available for
> download. But clicking on the link directs me to the PGP Corp website.
> If I read their site correctly, they want you to download version 9 as
> a trial version, and if you don't decide to purchase it, it will
> revert to the functionality of 8.1 in 30 days.
>
> Sounds OK to me, but I wanted to ask the knowledgeable people in this
> group if there are any pitfalls in this arrangement. Or if there are
> other freeware versions which are acceptable for basic use (not
> PGPdisk, etc.)
>
> Many thanks!
>
> Jack
>
You might find this helpful (its from an old post here)
http://www.educ.ps.toyaku.ac.jp/~kosugi/pgp/PGP810-PF-W.zip
http://ftp.idg.se/natkom/arkiv/sakerhet/kryptering/pgp/PGP810-PF-W.zip
http://www.pcworld.com.vn/pcworld/info/download/PGP810-PF-W.zip
http://ftp.idg.se/natkom/arkiv/sakerhet/kryptering/pgp/PGP810-PF-W.zip
http://www.download.plustech.pl/security/PGP%208.1/PGP810-PF-W.zip
MD5 = 943DCBB52564FAD5180DAE82B03FA6B4
SHA-160 = 363A666AE43166B83F8A5E69B511AFB06DE3B133
Casey
Me thisBox
Hash: RIPEMD160
Version 9 Which I own SUCKS, is _Broken_ and should be pulled off the
shelves. PGPCorp should start Selling and supporting 8.x again and quit
lying to us about the functionality of 9.x.
JClark wrote:
> I purchased 8.1 from PGP corp for $59 in 2004 and have been using it
> (minimally) without problem. I don't see any need to upgrade to v9.
> But a friend wants to use the freeware version and doesn't need
> anything but the basic uses, so I tried to get it from the PGP
> International website, where they list version 8.0.6 as available for
> download. But clicking on the link directs me to the PGP Corp website.
> If I read their site correctly, they want you to download version 9 as
> a trial version, and if you don't decide to purchase it, it will
> revert to the functionality of 8.1 in 30 days.
>
> Sounds OK to me, but I wanted to ask the knowledgeable people in this
> group if there are any pitfalls in this arrangement. Or if there are
> other freeware versions which are acceptable for basic use (not
> PGPdisk, etc.)
>
> Many thanks!
>
> Jack
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Use PGP/GnuPG to protech and verify files and messages
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFD0OtkaAMUqSo6hxERA/3HAKCeIKfbQw+qw/ZDkDV0RQi8vN+9AwCg2vwi
n/E7W4auW/IgCn0FjeyjALs=
=J5vC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
George Orwell
Hash: SHA1
In article <cv30t19kaclju2jkj...@4ax.com>
JClark <johnmc1937{cut-this}@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I purchased 8.1 from PGP corp for $59 in 2004 and have been using it
> (minimally) without problem. I don't see any need to upgrade to v9.
PGP 9 has known issues and the 8.1 version is IMHO better for
basic uses. (There is also 6.5.8 ckt version, with full functionality
for free...) You can use also freeware alternatives, Google for GnuPG,
WinPT and GPGee.
For Linux/UNIX users - GnuPG with optional GUI - KGPG.
> But a friend wants to use the freeware version and doesn't need
> anything but the basic uses, so I tried to get it from the PGP
> International website, where they list version 8.0.6 as available for
> download. But clicking on the link directs me to the PGP Corp website.
> If I read their site correctly, they want you to download version 9 as
> a trial version, and if you don't decide to purchase it, it will
> revert to the functionality of 8.1 in 30 days.
Not exactly-email proxy in v9 will be still active and it can be
quite annoying, it's just overkill for me, specially in the
freeware version with basic funcionality.
WinPT and GPGee are really good for basic use and completly free.
If you want to download 8.1 there is a post few topics earlier
with link, just be sure to check one of these hashes:
MD5 = 943dcbb52564fad5180dae82b03fa6b4
SHA-160 = 363a666ae43166b83f8a5e69b511afb06de3b133
SHA-256 = 7da393019cc252b5bb7910d25cb4d8565490b186139f54279f685a61f8a55e1d
RIPEMD160 = 0a2f7564e8389909afebfe4c947e9b286f2a3ce3
or this detached signature from PGP corp.
decrypt it with password: pgp
- -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP)
jA0EAwMCI0VYdiWpmRZgyWdInXo8qN8o6477N+5P2O91qYM/HJL1yopMmJFtGzD2
GZcyrzndeA5RC6APqFoYD2XjyC5bPI4X7kc+JhX6Nxf0R4/oA9J09acQvz3o7yyj
4moOBMMcKMrcCPI0pVnn8rpwvLU1k74J
=QVM1
- -----END PGP MESSAGE-----
cypher
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBQ9ET0SPnLg7nPH4AEQJ/qgCeJlgVBrVEbx+AwbP74BbWc7XtiYwAn1Ea
qrXi+xB74g44qllG0bruIWu0
=xdaV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Bala
always go back to freeware 8.1.
PGP 9 is very buggy.
Millie Tant
I have to say that I have had no problems at all & have no complaints re the
functionality of the product.
"Vrodok the Troll" <Pay....@70.cents.pls> wrote in message
news:2bq2t19fsqb2oa6au...@4ax.com...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> Once Upon A Time (on Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:53:41 GMT), in
> alt.security.pgp, Me thisBox <M...@thisThiForum.org>, by way of
> Message-id <EX5Af.23945$Xg2....@fe01.news.easynews.com>, wrote:
>
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>Hash: RIPEMD160
>>
>>Version 9 Which I own SUCKS, is _Broken_ and should be pulled off the
>>shelves. PGPCorp should start Selling and supporting 8.x again and
>>quit lying to us about the functionality of 9.x.
> [snip]
>
> I wonder what "keeping up with the Jones's" bit entered into the minds
> of the folks over at PGP.com, when they decided to introduce v9.x.x.
> Both in private, and here, I've certainly seen _Far_ more complaints
> about 9.x.x, rather than v8.1.
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 8.1
> Comment: Use PGP for security and authentication
>
> iQCVAwUBQ9FqPO2J/4zOuEl1AQG1twQAs+1WpP5/I7rLnunH78m9AkCSv6xaKsY7
> t4hXZb9bbd6mzPJx8EJOuvf+4UrNoisLLdM65MZChkt1QjteMK0ZjmDMDmCQF1U7
> LXoj2l6auCOH1eT6L+cI5/g1xcOQuSAKeZW4xeQt+DJ42wddYksE69CssTzYXF4K
> tBnrq/exFYM=
> =rNf3
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
Bob Henson
Vrodok the Troll wrote
>>>Version 9 Which I own SUCKS, is _Broken_ and should be pulled off the
>>>shelves. PGPCorp should start Selling and supporting 8.x again and
>>>quit lying to us about the functionality of 9.x.
>
> I wonder what "keeping up with the Jones's" bit entered into the minds
> of the folks over at PGP.com, when they decided to introduce v9.x.x.
> Both in private, and here, I've certainly seen _Far_ more complaints
> about 9.x.x, rather than v8.1.
The main reason that they gave for the huge changes in 9.x (and, for a
change, I believe them) was to make PGP work with any e-mail program in the
manner of PGP Universal. The Outlook plug-in was completely broken by 8.1
and couldn't co-exist with X.509 (the problem was there in 8.0 but didn't
show - which was worse) , OE and many other clients were restricted to
in-line signing, and Thunderbird (and others?) broke in-line signing
completely. The obvious way to go was a client independent "transparent
proxy" type of set-up. The idea was splendid, it was the implementation
which was a total failure.
Whether or not it was rushed out too soon in an attempt to attempt to
placate people (me included) who were moaning about 8.1, I don't know.
Having seen their total failure to improve matters in the newer versions, it
would appear that time wasn't a factor, or they would have got it right by
now - so the many bugs that render 9.x more or less unusable must be pretty
basic. Adding features that have yet to become recognised standards ahead of
time caused more chaos with user of other standards compliant software, and
the trouble caused by the ill-conceived Global Directory have managed to
send many long-standing users like myself over to GnuPG/Enigmail and away
from PGP for good.
Regards,
Bob
--
Remove "x" from address to reply by email.
Bob Henson
Vrodok the Troll wrote
> What _was_ Phil Zimmerman (?) thinking?
I would guess that PGP Corporation are moving in a direction that he would
not like in any way. The fact he is reselling the program way below their
price speaks volumes in itself. Maybe he'll tell us if he's out there
listening - Ping Phil?
Nemo
(in article <JeqdndhIovN...@brightview.com>):
>
>
> Vrodok the Troll wrote
>
>> What _was_ Phil Zimmerman (?) thinking?
>
> I would guess that PGP Corporation are moving in a direction that he would
> not like in any way. The fact he is reselling the program way below their
> price speaks volumes in itself. Maybe he'll tell us if he's out there
> listening - Ping Phil?
>
> Regards,
>
> Bob
>
>
>
I guess by moving in a direction he would not like means something other than
selling a program that is very buggy. Considering what he went through to get
PGP going I am surprised that he is re-selling a program that has as many
issues as 9.xx
Hud
Bob Henson
Nemo wrote
>>> What _was_ Phil Zimmerman (?) thinking?
>> I would guess that PGP Corporation are moving in a direction that he would
>> not like in any way. The fact he is reselling the program way below their
>> price speaks volumes in itself. Maybe he'll tell us if he's out there
>> listening - Ping Phil?
> I guess by moving in a direction he would not like means something other than
> selling a program that is very buggy. Considering what he went through to get
> PGP going I am surprised that he is re-selling a program that has as many
> issues as 9.xx
So am I. Again, one can only speculate but I'm betting that one of the
reasons PGP sell him the program at a price (or give it to him) that enables
him to sell it on much cheaper than them is that they can't afford *not* to
have him associated with the program. If he turned round and said the
program was a real load of tripe, PGP would be in real trouble - certainly
as far a sales of the Desktop varieties are concerned.
Bob Henson
JClark wrote
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:05:26 +0100 (CET), George Orwell
> <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>
>>WinPT and GPGee are really good for basic use and completly free
> But will they work with PGP? In other words, if one person has a PGP
> key, can that person communicate with another computer which has WinPT
> installed? Does the WinPT public key work with PGP and vice versa?
Yes (with a couple of obscure exceptions introduced by PGP not sticking to
standards) - the keys and keyrings have nothing to do with the front end
programs that manipulate them - they all conform to the OpenPGP standard, so
keys formed under PGP can be used by GnuPG and vice versa. My keys were
mostly formed years ago with PGP, but I now use them under GnuPG.
Anonymous
Hash: SHA1
In article <7m27t1pdhfjjcf9h1...@4ax.com>
JClark <johnmc1937{cut-this}@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:05:26 +0100 (CET), George Orwell
> <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>
> >WinPT and GPGee are really good for basic use and completly free
> But will they work with PGP? In other words, if one person has a PGP
> key, can that person communicate with another computer which has WinPT
> installed? Does the WinPT public key work with PGP and vice versa?
" GnuPG is a complete and free replacement for PGP. Because it
does not use the patented IDEA algorithm, it can be used
without any restrictions. GnuPG is a RFC2440 (OpenPGP) compliant
application."
"GPGee is a shell extension for Windows explorer that acts as an
assistant for using GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG/GPG)."
"WinPT is a taskbar front-end for GnuPG which includes key
management, encryption via the clipboard and/or direct file
encryption and support for OpenPGP smartcards."
Like you see they all are using GnuPG (GPG). GPG would be
enough, but you want some GUI for it (GPG is command-line),
GPGee and WinPT are a GUI. GPG is working good with PGP. There
are only some rare problems. Everyting should be working
perfectly for you. I have GnuPG with WinPT, GPGee and PGP 8.1 on
my system and they are working well with each other with
absolutely no problems.
First install GPG:
ftp://ftp.gnupg.org/gcrypt/binary/gnupg-w32cli-1.4.2.exe
Than WinPT:
http://wald.intevation.org/frs/download.php/121/winpt-0.11.6-exe.zip
(note that WinPT is in testing version)
and GPGee:
http://www.excelcia.org/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=getit&lid=50
cypher
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQA/AwUBQ9OdnyPnLg7nPH4AEQLT+wCfTE1P+WY4UXTxf+0+3JfxNw0TlSEAoJYd
zYOQ4UVe3Kt4HoSKfqovuV1E
=v8kD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Marshall D Abrams
letting it revert to 8.1 functionality. After a month I am seeing a
message that I can use it for another 60 days. What happens after 60
days?
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:26:33 GMT, JClark
<johnmc1937{cut-this}@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I purchased 8.1 from PGP corp for $59 in 2004 and have been using it
>(minimally) without problem. I don't see any need to upgrade to v9.
>But a friend wants to use the freeware version and doesn't need
>anything but the basic uses, so I tried to get it from the PGP
>International website, where they list version 8.0.6 as available for
>download. But clicking on the link directs me to the PGP Corp website.
>If I read their site correctly, they want you to download version 9 as
>a trial version, and if you don't decide to purchase it, it will
>revert to the functionality of 8.1 in 30 days.
>