PGP with Snow Leopard ?

Not everybody wants the commercial proprietary version

Thanks a lot man.
Nice of you to help the community 🙂

John Lockwood wrote:
Everyone seems fixated on GPGMail, as I pointed out PGP.com have confirmed they will be updating their product for Snow Leopard Compatibility.

Aside from the excessively high cost of PGP, my understanding is that PGP email uses some sort of intercepter in lieu of a plug-in, and the result is that your encrypted mail is stored in an unencrypted form on your computer after you've read it.

I could be mistaken about this, as I just learned about it from reading the PGP forums, but this would be a deal-breaker too, as it doesn't protect this data in the event of theft of your laptop, etc.

That's what FileVault or a Full Disk Encryption solution is for.

leeb00 wrote:

John Lockwood wrote:
Everyone seems fixated on GPGMail, as I pointed out PGP.com have confirmed they will be updating their product for Snow Leopard Compatibility.

Aside from the excessively high cost of PGP, my understanding is that PGP email uses some sort of intercepter in lieu of a plug-in, and the result is that your encrypted mail is stored in an unencrypted form on your computer after you've read it.

I could be mistaken about this, as I just learned about it from reading the PGP forums, but this would be a deal-breaker too, as it doesn't protect this data in the event of theft of your laptop, etc.

The pricing for PGP is weird and I can see why you think it is expensive and I am now confused by their pricing.

I had originally for my own needs looked at PGP Whole Disk Encryption, and PGP Desktop Professional. Desktop Professional is basically Whole Disk Encryption plus Email encryption. The difference in price of these is only £80 but the cheapest email only version is £149 (a lot more). I had expected the email only (Desktop Email) product to be cheaper than the Whole Disk Encryption only product.

Regarding how it works, certainly I have confirmed the Windows version works as an email proxy so this would support what you found and is indeed 'bad'.

I also found the following in a PGP Desktop (for Mac) ReadMe

+"PGP Desktop is initially installed in Automatic mode. You may change this in the+
+Preferences if necessary to accommodate your environment. Automatic mode uses Mac OS X’s built-+
+in firewall functionality to redirect your email client connections through PGP Desktop."+

So I agree it is looking a bad solution.

Well, GnuPG does not work well for me since I moved to SL. Was using it with Enigmail/Thunderbird in Leopard without any issue, but right after upgrade to SL it complains about not being able to access some temporary files when I want to sign/encrypt an email 😟

We could use exchange or entourage or some other MicroGarbage or T-Chicken but we like mail.app and apple can't think of everything though they may like to think they can.

The Certificate is more of a P.I.T.A then setting up the Also Free software to support GPG.. All that is asked for is the documented API so that users can write plugins to work with Apples apps.. I'm the customer I'm right.. It used to work.. Undocumented (bad Idea) well why not document it and cut the workload of reverse engineering the code.

Apple should make GPGMail default in Mail.app that would be the best option.

We have used Apple Mail with GPG the for many years with success.

We just switched all our Mac Clients to SnowLeopard and we replaced AppleMail by Postbox with the enigmail plug-in. Postbox is lightning fast, very innovative and the encryption is working seamlessly.

I also switched to Postbox, and it does indeed run Enigmail to handle GPG messages. As the poster above said, it runs fast and is integrated with the Mac address book, unlike Thunderbird. It also run many Thunderbird add-ons, and has a much nicer folder arrangement than Apple Mail (which groups all sent together, all trash together, etc.) This makes it much easier to navigate. There are $10 discounts available right now too.

Indeed S/MIME is useless for PGP users.

S/MIME is also inferior in a whole wide range of areas to PGP.

I find it almost unbelievable that Apple still doesn't have built-in support for PGP, especially in view that they use PGP to sign their software!

It is indeed very sad that Apple feel free to make incompatible changes to the Mail plugin API, and even worse that they don't support third party developers in ways that would allow such missing features to be more easily added as plugins.

Indeed more users need to go to the feedback page and request full and modern support of PGP in Mail.

Unless PGP.com revive and fully support the Mail plugin for PGP signing and encryption then their promise to support Snow Leopard (and future releases) is pointless and futile.

The current PGP.com release is an evil application that goes behind the user's, and more importantly the system administrator's, back and offers little true support for PGP in the way that users demand.

Only proper integrated support in the MUA makes sense for decent use of PGP to form a secure e-mail environment.