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

At some point hitherto, Derek Atkins hath spake thusly:
> "Derek D. Martin" <ddm@pizzashack.org> writes:
> 
> > IMO, the best advice I can give you is switch to GPG.  I think it's
> > supported better, and easier to use (though this may just be personal
> > preference).  Also, I've no idea what version you're using, but I've
> > also heard in various security circles that NAI has mucked with the
> > code for more recent versions of PGP at NSA's request.  I will not
> > speculate as to whether this is rumor or substantiated fact...
> 
> Please stop spreading unfounded rumors and FUD.
> 
> The code for PGP 6.5.8 is available from the same sources that the
> binaries.  And no, the NSA did not get any back doors into it.

Sorry, I was actually speaking of PGP Security from NAI, which as far
as I know you can NOT get the source for.  And I was told this by a
source that I normally trust for this kind of info.  You can choose to
believe it or not.

- -- 
Derek Martin               ddm@pizzashack.org    
- ---------------------------------------------
I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG!
GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D
Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu
Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE8IiMKdjdlQoHP510RAogdAJ9DIw955cvvh4ZQnTQxVSWI43WG/wCgi4sf
oFJZoKvGu41h+m/W//ePbxs=
=t77l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----