Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Zimmermann Suggests Freeing PGP Source

Posted by timothy on from the like-the-wind dept.

broody writes "NewsForge has an interesting article detailing Phillip R Zimmermann's lament at selling PGP. Since he cannot afford to buy it back outright, he is pushing for Network Associates to 'open source' it. Well, the GUI and SDK anyway. I'll say this, he's an interesting little capitalist."

11 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Dead Man's Switch by peterdaly · · Score: 4, Interesting

    His idea for a Dead Man's Switch license would be very interesting to see implemented. It would be nice to see something like that used in a lot of commercial software.

    Think of all the software that might still be available if they had such a clause in their license. Hell, just the games!

    -Pete

    --
    Soccer Goal Plans
  2. GPG is just fine but GUI needs work by saphena · · Score: 2, Interesting

    PGP being sold out was the inspiration for the OpenPGP project which generated GPG, a perfectly good alternative to PGP.

    The only real problem with GPG is the comparative lack of high quality "mere end user" facilities such as a good GUI.

    Let's all dump PGP, it's served its purpose and its time is done. Put your effort into making GPG (real open source!) widely accepted and used.

    1. Re:GPG is just fine but GUI needs work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Why not check out WinPT?

      They have a nice little frontend for GPG that can sit in your system tray, and related projects bring GPG in to the Mozilla and Eudora mail clients as well. Plus, it's GPL'ed.

      That's only for Windows, but I'm sure there are plenty of good GPG front ends for Linux and other Operating Systems as well.

      I've switched, and I'm not looking back.

  3. A thought by Real+World+Stuff · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since he developed PGP, why not develop a RGP, or Really Good Privacy. He can keep this one open, and it can compete with the closed source version.

    It offers the liberty of being Free and Free.

    Just my .0199999999

    --
    If we don't fight for ourselves no one will.
  4. Unreleased Updates by MacDork · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've read on numerous occasions that NA has versions of PGP updated to run on OS X and XP, but aren't releasing them. Something to do with 9/11 maybe? It seems stupid to simply throw away a defacto standard.

    Let's hope the geeks here make that problem irrelevant. So far the Mac side is doing *OK* with tools like GPG Tools, GPGMail, and Apple's own AES encrypted volumes using Disk Copy. However, syncing with key servers, file wiping and other functionality available in PGPFreeware is sorely missed. Maybe Phil Z should start a company focused on GPG rather than wasting his energy trying to get PGP open sourced...

    1. Re:Unreleased Updates by zulux · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To stroke the black helicopter theories...

      Several friends of mine work at Microsoft, and apparently, according to one of them - important government types have been at the Microsoft campus. This gist is that has somthing to do with the whole DRM/encryption thingy.

      It makes sense in a odd sort of way - if the govenment could get a back door into the worlds most popular operating system, they would have a goldmine. I'd be disapointed in the NSA if they diden't try.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

  5. Phil, Please Join Us! by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Phil,

    We'd really like you to join the work on GnuPG, and on GUI projects like GNOME. I think it would be most productive to write off the PGP code base and continue your work on the existing Free Software projects. We've gotten most of the hard work done already.

    Thanks

    Bruce

    --
    Bruce Perens.
  6. One reason for PGP over GPL by DrXym · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Assuming PGP was open sourced and was covered by a sensible licence, it could easily steal a march over GPG.


    The principle issue that faces any developer wishing to integrate GPG is that it is covered by GPL. That means that even if it had an SDK (which the isn't) you couldn't link with it without infecting your own code. Even LGPL libs can't link with it. At present if you wish to use GPG, you must mess around constructing command line arguments, opening pipes etc., invoking it and then parse the results. It is a major pain. There are libraries such as GPGME that hide some of this from you but it is still slower than running in-process and has significant issues running on platforms like Windows or Mac where piping etc. might be done differently.


    If PGP were opened up with either a LGPL or BSD style licence I can see it being used in preference to GPG. GPG has the better command-line interface and might be ok for scripts but PGP has an SDK (as well as a great UI on Win32) and would be ultimately faster if software can link directly to it.

  7. Phil should work on Mozilla by PingXao · · Score: 4, Interesting

    PZ should get involved with Mozilla. For literally years I've been waiting for someone to build in some sort of public-key email (and newsgroup) crypto. It's still not there yet, and THAT has prevented several people I know - including myself - from adopting Mozilla as my sole internet access tool. I'd love to be able to dump some of the crap I run for email and usenet.

    First it was the export restrictions that were deterring Mozilla crypto. Now it's something else. I guess these projects qualify for some of what's being done today, but I needed Mozilla to do built-in crypto years ago. The standard Mozilla comeback is "do it yourself". Well, I have neither the time nor the skill to do that. But Phil does!

  8. NSA by zootread · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe the NSA will buy it and then open source it, then include it with their SE Linux.

    --
    Zoot!
  9. nobody gets it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Network Associates is sitting on the code to squash it. They don't want to sell it. They don't want to make money off it. They want to keep it unavailable. Texaco owned the patent for fuel injection systems in cars. Until that patent expired (patents used to expire), no cars had fuel injection. If you don't remember, they might want to look back at the date on the press release that Network Associates (a.k.a. McAffee) released, stating that they planned to discontinue PGP. It's pretty close to September 12, 2001.