How to Save PGP 235
Tomcat666 sends in: "The Register got some excerpts from an interview with Phil Zimmerman. He talks about how it might be possible to save PGP (Network Associates couldn't sell it, and will stop its development), OpenPGP and the future (industry-backed OpenPGP?)." A follow-up to our story yesterday about Network Associates mothballing PGP.
The lesson learned is... (Score:2, Insightful)
Make your pet projects free from the start.
Notice that Phil wants to release it under a BSD style license. As much as we'd all like that, it probably isn't going to happen.
RTFA (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the end of commercial PGP. This isn't a good thing for PGP to be used in commercial settings. Also this is the end of the PGPDesktop which was the only thing close to an option for (l)users.
Hopefully NSI will release the code in a manner that will allow a smaller company to add value and repackage it to large corporations.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Think about that, how many computer programs would you trust your life with?
Re:Save it WHY? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Please do correct me if I'm wrong, but (Score:2, Insightful)
GPG, OpenPGP, and what needs saving (Score:5, Insightful)
He clearly states that the PGP protocol is in no danger whatsoever, and will continue to remain widely implemented.
Having spent many hours deciphering gpg command lines to use PGP to its full potential makes you realize how usefull a simple, easy to use GUI interface to a PGP would be. (Implicit in this task is integration with other applications, however, you can find plugin support for almost anything that you wish to use PGP in)
I don't get it... (Score:4, Insightful)
Plus, there is GPG, PGPi, and other freeware implementations of the standard (under the umbrella of OpenPGP.org).
I don't see why "PGP" as a whole is going down.
It's like saying if Microsoft or Netscape decided to stop relasing browsers, then the entire WWW is doomed, when there's still Konquerer, Opera, Mozilla, and the whole W3C standards body, etc...
Re:Why? (Score:1, Insightful)
Oh wait... NO!!
BEFORE you post a reply, read this:
1) Yes, I know, microsoft software sucks. That's not what I'm arguing about.
2) I'm also aware some companies use EULAs to eliminate their liability. You should buy from someone who doesn't do this if you need quality-certified software.
3) This has nothing to do with linux, beowulf clusters, or Linus Torvalds.
Re:Why save PGP? (Score:4, Insightful)
Usability? GUI?
Re:Why not... (Score:4, Insightful)
It didn't even take 10 minutes... Can someone tell me what PGP being open/closed source has to do with Microsoft? Last I checked NAI was the vendor of the product, and it was CLOSED source. From what I've heard this is an excellent product, and it's a shame to loose, no matter what plaform you run. Just because something is Open Source doesn't mean it's better. Do you think that the majority of the best coders do work for free, or for profit? And despite what you may think, some of the most talented people in this industry work at Microsoft (and NAI for that matter)... As for public vs. non-public disclosure of security issues, I'm sure that MS has plenty of reasons for NOT releasing their vulnerabilities. They have to take things into consideration that the Open Source community does not. With all the MS haters out there, as SOON as a vulnerability is announced, there are tens of thousands of script kiddies in their basement trying to wreak havoc on the Internet. Should there be vulnerabilities? No, but it's a fact of ANY software development. It doesn't mean there aren't a thousand people at MS slaving away trying to make their products better. Have a little more respect and appreciation for the scale of the systems we are even able to create nowadays. Damn zealots.
Re:Sorta Phil's fault (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it was definitely advantageous to have the corporate support of PGP in order to get it entrenched (however deeply it is) in the business world. Now, with commercial PGP going away, it's possible companies will have no choice but to move to open sourced alternatives and implementations if they wish to keep their security and privacy intact.
Re:GPGME - GPG Made Easy (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, but in the Real World we still need to support Windows.
Note that GPGME isn't really a GPG library. It uses the GPG command-line behind the scenes, so it is inherently unportable - you can't get IO from another running process in ISO C.
When I suggested creating a PGP library, I meant a true library. Make the code ISO9899 compliant, then the only issue is linking it to the front end.
Re:Please do correct me if I'm wrong, but (Score:2, Insightful)
If you can't sell it . . . (Score:1, Insightful)