Been using it for years, first with ELM, and then with Mutt. I remember seeing that Pine even supports it now (a good mail reader for newbies).
One nice feature with Mutt is that you can auto-encrypt based on the person(s) you're sending to. So there's no action required at all to auto-encrypt messages to those you have a public keys for versus sending a regular mail. I use this all the time.
Too bad we can't tour everyone through their ISP and show them "tcpdump | strings" or an SMTP packet sniffer (or Carnivore) running on a backbone, which any yahoo can run. 'lot more folks would be using encryption I bet.;-)
Out of site, out of mind. Just pretend it's not happening...
For future projects, you may want to consider a BSD-style license. Code developed under it doesn't have this problem.
A BSD style license also doesn't prevent you from using pieces of your own code developed for an Open Source package (under the BSD license) in another system you develop commercially. You wrote it; you own it; you can use it.
With GPL, if this situation arises, you must forget you ever wrote the GPL code and "reengineer" it for your commercial development, or have someone else reengineer it. Costs you extra time, but AFAIK that's what you have to do to abide by the license and honor its source release terms.
Given this and a few other points, it seems to me that GPL is a good license for hobby developers; BSD is the better license for professional programmers.
Slashdot Mirror
Been using it for years, first with ELM, and then with Mutt. I remember seeing that Pine even supports it now (a good mail reader for newbies). One nice feature with Mutt is that you can auto-encrypt based on the person(s) you're sending to. So there's no action required at all to auto-encrypt messages to those you have a public keys for versus sending a regular mail. I use this all the time. Too bad we can't tour everyone through their ISP and show them "tcpdump | strings" or an SMTP packet sniffer (or Carnivore) running on a backbone, which any yahoo can run. 'lot more folks would be using encryption I bet. ;-)
Out of site, out of mind. Just pretend it's not happening...
FBI's Carnivore To Undergo University Review
The final review team will include ...
Donald Kerr, the FBI's Laboratory division
assistant director ...
Sounds like this is gonna be real objective.
A pointless political stunt and a waste of taxpayer's money.
For future projects, you may want to consider a BSD-style license. Code developed under it doesn't have this problem.
A BSD style license also doesn't prevent you from using pieces of your own code developed for an Open Source package (under the BSD license) in another system you develop commercially. You wrote it; you own it; you can use it.
With GPL, if this situation arises, you must forget you ever wrote the GPL code and "reengineer" it for your commercial development, or have someone else reengineer it. Costs you extra time, but AFAIK that's what you have to do to abide by the license and honor its source release terms.
Given this and a few other points, it seems to me that GPL is a good license for hobby developers; BSD is the better license for professional programmers.