Discussion:
Install and Use Older PGP Versions in Windows 7
(too old to reply)
David E. Ross
2013-10-23 18:45:41 UTC
Permalink
Is there some way to run older PGP versions with Windows 7? I have the
following, all of which worked fine with Windows XP SP3:

PGP 8.0.3: I used this for my normal encryption, decryption, SDA
creation, and digital signing

PGP 5.0: I used this to maintain a special keyring without having to
change the PGP 8.0.3 file options.

PGP 2.6.2: I used this with anonymous remailing applications
JackBeNymble and Mixmaster, which required a command-line PGP
capability. (I have not yet tried to install those anonymous remailing
applications.)
--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

Where does your elected official stand? Which
politicians refuse to tell us where they stand?
See the non-partisan Project Vote Smart at
<http://votesmart.org/>.
David E. Ross
2013-10-23 22:53:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by David E. Ross
Is there some way to run older PGP versions with Windows 7? I have the
PGP 8.0.3: I used this for my normal encryption, decryption, SDA
creation, and digital signing
PGP 5.0: I used this to maintain a special keyring without having to
change the PGP 8.0.3 file options.
PGP 2.6.2: I used this with anonymous remailing applications
JackBeNymble and Mixmaster, which required a command-line PGP
capability. (I have not yet tried to install those anonymous remailing
applications.)
In place of PGP 8.0.3, I was able to install PGP 10.1.2. Will I have to
abandon anonymous remailing?
--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

Where does your elected official stand? Which
politicians refuse to tell us where they stand?
See the non-partisan Project Vote Smart at
<http://votesmart.org/>.
TomT
2013-10-24 00:14:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by David E. Ross
Post by David E. Ross
Is there some way to run older PGP versions with Windows 7? I have the
PGP 8.0.3: I used this for my normal encryption, decryption, SDA
creation, and digital signing
PGP 5.0: I used this to maintain a special keyring without having to
change the PGP 8.0.3 file options.
PGP 2.6.2: I used this with anonymous remailing applications
JackBeNymble and Mixmaster, which required a command-line PGP
capability. (I have not yet tried to install those anonymous remailing
applications.)
In place of PGP 8.0.3, I was able to install PGP 10.1.2. Will I have to
abandon anonymous remailing?
OK, David, here's another random thought: GPG? I think of that when I
hear "command line". And another disclaimer: I don't know zip about
anonymous remailing applications.

My encryption use is limited to the occasional email and encrypting and
decrypting files. I'm using Mepis (linux) with gpg installed.

TomT
Nomen Nescio
2013-10-24 01:30:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by David E. Ross
Post by David E. Ross
Is there some way to run older PGP versions with Windows 7?
PGP 2.6.2: I used this with anonymous remailing applications
JackBeNymble and Mixmaster, which required a command-line PGP
capability. (I have not yet tried to install those anonymous
remailing applications.)
In place of PGP 8.0.3, I was able to install PGP 10.1.2.
Will I have to abandon anonymous remailing?
you need pursue qsl and mix3
or handroll typeI/cpunk

jbn is non compat (catalyst sockettools)
David W. Hodgins
2013-10-24 03:43:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by David E. Ross
In place of PGP 8.0.3, I was able to install PGP 10.1.2. Will I have to
abandon anonymous remailing?
Try gpg (GnuPG) 2.0.22 (Gpg4win 2.2.1).

Regards, Dave Hodgins.
--
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)
Harry
2013-11-06 01:17:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by David E. Ross
In place of PGP 8.0.3, I was able to install PGP 10.1.2. Will I have to
abandon anonymous remailing?
Out of curiosity, where/when did you get PGP 10.1.2?

I purchased PGP Desktop Home 9.6.3 from PGP Corp. in 2007 for my
Windows/XP system. Since it seemed to be working flawlessly ever since,
I never bothered to look into any upgrades. However now that XP is going
off technical support in 2014, I need to get something more current. I
tried approaching Symantec about this but they just tell me to purchase
some of their products and won't make the older PGP products or patches
available to me. It isn't even clear to me which of their products will
provide both email and disk encryption other than the $258.00
professional version; they have two separate products that provide
either disk encryption or email encryption.

Symantec had no record that I had purchased PGP legitimately so I sent
them my PGP licensing info, etc. but still they won't budge. Somehow, it
seems, when they took over PGP not all of PGP's existing customer
records were copied over.

I was looking at GPG4WIN but it does not appear to have the equivalent
to PGP Disk, just a file by file encryption function.
--
Harry
Wilfried
2013-11-06 08:08:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry
Post by David E. Ross
In place of PGP 8.0.3, I was able to install PGP 10.1.2. Will I have to
abandon anonymous remailing?
Out of curiosity, where/when did you get PGP 10.1.2?
I purchased PGP Desktop Home 9.6.3 from PGP Corp. in 2007 for my
Windows/XP system. Since it seemed to be working flawlessly ever since,
I never bothered to look into any upgrades. However now that XP is going
off technical support in 2014, I need to get something more current. I
tried approaching Symantec about this but they just tell me to purchase
some of their products and won't make the older PGP products or patches
available to me. It isn't even clear to me which of their products will
provide both email and disk encryption other than the $258.00
professional version; they have two separate products that provide
either disk encryption or email encryption.
Symantec had no record that I had purchased PGP legitimately so I sent
them my PGP licensing info, etc. but still they won't budge. Somehow, it
seems, when they took over PGP not all of PGP's existing customer
records were copied over.
I was looking at GPG4WIN but it does not appear to have the equivalent
to PGP Disk, just a file by file encryption function.
You are right, GPG4WIN does not have disk encryption, it can only
encrypt files and folders.
For disk encryption, have a look at http://www.truecrypt.org/
--
Wilfried Hennings
please reply in the newsgroup, the e-mail address is invalid
Harry
2013-11-06 21:18:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wilfried
You are right, GPG4WIN does not have disk encryption, it can only
encrypt files and folders.
For disk encryption, have a look at http://www.truecrypt.org/
Thanks, that may be a good alternative. Do you know if TrueCrypt can
coexist with GPG4WIN?

It is unfortunate that Symantec broke up PGP the way they did. I paid
$99 for PGP Desktop Home 9.6 back in 2007 and it has everything a home
user would ever need: PGPZip, PGPDisk and PGPEmail plus key management.
For a little more I could have included PGPNetshare and PGPWhole Disk.
Symantec sells most of these as separate products.
--
Harry
David W. Hodgins
2013-11-06 21:33:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry
Post by Wilfried
You are right, GPG4WIN does not have disk encryption, it can only
encrypt files and folders.
For disk encryption, have a look at http://www.truecrypt.org/
Thanks, that may be a good alternative. Do you know if TrueCrypt can
coexist with GPG4WIN?
Yes. Another option is
http://sourceforge.net/projects/freeotfe/?source=directory
which can create and use encrypted filesystems compatible with
linux cryptsetup.

Regards, Dave Hodgins
--
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)
Harry
2013-11-06 21:46:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by David W. Hodgins
Post by Harry
Thanks, that may be a good alternative. Do you know if TrueCrypt can
coexist with GPG4WIN?
Yes. Another option is
http://sourceforge.net/projects/freeotfe/?source=directory
which can create and use encrypted filesystems compatible with
linux cryptsetup.
Regards, Dave Hodgins
Great! I am starting to think about moving from Windows to a Linux
platform now that I no longer have a work need to keep a Windows platform.
--
Harry
David E. Ross
2013-11-07 00:17:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry
Post by David E. Ross
In place of PGP 8.0.3, I was able to install PGP 10.1.2. Will I have to
abandon anonymous remailing?
Out of curiosity, where/when did you get PGP 10.1.2?
I may have downloaded it two years ago from the PGP/Symantec Web site.
It took a large effort navigating through the site to finally reach a
download link. I don't really remember how I got there.

I didn't install 10.1.2 until I got a Windows 7 PC last month to replace
a dead Windows XP PC and found that 8.0.3 would not install. Until
then, 8.0.3 met all my needs. I had downloaded 10.1.2 just in case I
might need it in the future; the future came this year.
--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

Where does your elected official stand? Which
politicians refuse to tell us where they stand?
See the non-partisan Project Vote Smart at
<http://votesmart.org/>.
Harry
2013-11-08 00:08:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by David E. Ross
I didn't install 10.1.2 until I got a Windows 7 PC last month to replace
a dead Windows XP PC and found that 8.0.3 would not install. Until
then, 8.0.3 met all my needs. I had downloaded 10.1.2 just in case I
might need it in the future; the future came this year.
See? Thinking ahead wins the day :)
--
Harry
Wilfried
2013-11-04 15:09:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by David E. Ross
Is there some way to run older PGP versions with Windows 7? I have the
PGP 8.0.3: I used this for my normal encryption, decryption, SDA
creation, and digital signing
PGP 5.0: I used this to maintain a special keyring without having to
change the PGP 8.0.3 file options.
PGP 2.6.2: I used this with anonymous remailing applications
JackBeNymble and Mixmaster, which required a command-line PGP
capability. (I have not yet tried to install those anonymous remailing
applications.)
I installed pgp 6.5.8 under windows 7 with the following trick:
Before starting the install,
change the file properties of setup.exe to "Windows XP compatibility".

With this, everything works nicely.
--
Wilfried Hennings
please reply in the newsgroup, the e-mail address is invalid
Loading...