Re: [Full-Disclosure] a PGP signed mail? Has to be spam!

[Eric Bowser <ebowser@i-trap.net>]

The filtering service I sell considers PG signatures to be a plus, and
is less likely to get a SPAM hit.


On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 21:22, onedo@gmx.net wrote:
> Hi everyone
> 
> I had to notice something today that really disturbed me. A friend of 
> mine(working for a very big company) complained, that she doesn't get any 
> mails from me anymore. It turned out, that apparently my mails went straight 
> into the spam filter, as I signed everyone of them. When I sent unsigned 
> mails, she got them. What do we learn? Crypto is bad m'kay?
> But for real, does that mean that we won't be able to sign any mails anymore 
> soon, due to the spam problem(and stupid admins)?
> 'EGovernment' is the big word everywhere nowadays. The electronic signature 
> is 
> mentioned as a way to ensure the credidibility of sender and receiver. Now 
> what?
> Guys(and girls), the situation sucks. What do you think? And, most important 
> of all, do you see any way to fight this behaviour? Because honestly, I 
> don't. 
> Greets
> 
> $me
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
-- 
Eric J. Bowser 
330.658.9858 direct 
330.658.0123 fax 

i-TRAP Internet Security Services 
888-658-TRAP toll-free 
330.658.1040 local 
www.i-trap.net

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html