> I have not yet evaluated PGP but i will get around to do it soon as everyone
> seems to favor this program - for now we have settled for a free utility I
> got off the Ziff Davis site (www.zdnet.com) it uses a 160 bit encryption key
> and its very easy to use, its called Cryptext and work with the explorer so
> to encrypt or decrypt a file or director simply right-click and select
> encrypt, enter password and Voila

I don't know anything about Cryptext.  Howver, I would not depend on any
piece of cryptographic software unless source code is available and it has
been subjected to a substantial amount of public review.  PGP passes both
criteria; most cryptographic software fails both.

Just because software uses a 160 bit key doesn't make it secure.  I've seen
software use a 1024 bit key with a bad algorithm, which is completely
insecure.  Also, even with a large key length and a good algorithm, it is
still possible to build a weak cryptographic protocol, and this has in fact
happened countless times.

See "Applied Cryptography Second Edition" by Bruce Schneier:
        http://www.counterpane.com/applied.html

His web site also contains two good essays, "Why Cryptography is Harder than
it Looks":
        http://www.counterpane.com/whycrypto.html

and "Security Pitfalls in Cryptography":
        http://www.counterpane.com/pitfalls.html

Cheers,
Eric