From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <09cd01c384cd$6603e800$b9844051@insultant.net>
From: "boyd, rounin" <boyd@insultant.net>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
References: <20030926143949.N19995@cackle.proxima.alt.za> <2e7e48ea41b82dbd542a007030b41e0a@plan9.bell-labs.com> <20030926152349.O19995@cackle.proxima.alt.za> <076101c38463$002bb900$b9844051@insultant.net> <20030927080132.A27821@cackle.proxima.alt.za>
Subject: Re: [9fans] PEM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:00:19 +0200
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 518a7a16-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

i had a quick re-cap on PEM last night.  i'm not sure outlook supports it
but it would raise the bar in that it would be simple to just filter on having
the right sort of PEM glop in the message body.  this is just for auth,
not for encryption; the message is sent in the clear.

the PEM glop could even be fake ;)  avoiding the hideous x.509 root
CA nightmare.  now, if i could get my hands on a CA that i could trust
without chucking money at Verisad (sic) [who i don't trust] et al ...