[pdftex] Re: pdftex-pdfcrypt - The Missing Link(?).

[Greg Black]

Michael Chapman wrote:

| On Wednesday 18 April 2001 09:08, Greg Black wrote:
| 
| > This goal is much better met by attaching a digital signature
| > with PGP or GPG and leaving the document in a form that allows
| > its readers to use it in ways that are comfortable for them.
| >
| But what proposrtion of e-mail recipients have (functionally) access to 
| (and/or understanding of) PGP/GPG?
| Conversely, Acrobat is installed on most people's boxes. 

GPG and PGP are as easy to obtain as acrobat.

| > As the idiot commercial sector continues to demonstrate (surely
| > people still remember the DVD nonsense), trying to lock stuff up
| > simply doesn't work.  It just annoys legitimate users and does
| > nothing to stop determined people from getting at it anyway.
| >
| > How long do you think it would take me to produce the printed
| > version of your version that is supposed to prevent printing?
| >
| It was me that mentionned the 14-year old cracker, so whilst I accept the 
| other points made -if not agreeing with them in detail- I think this last 
| one (and the feminist jibe) are uncalled for.

What feminist jibe?

| I do also work for a (law) publisher. Security, IP protection are not binary. 
| They are about balances of convenience to both supplier and user.
| pdfcrypt extends the possibilities and thus allows better balances.

No, pdfcrypt merely annoys users.  I refuse to read stuff with
that nonsense, and I'm not alone.