[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Henry Hertz Hobbit) writes:
Now I wonder why GPG needs random data for symmetric
encryption. Should I care about the message or not?
And how can I make it disappear?
The SHORT answer is, yes it does need random data for just doing
symmetric encryption. Yes, you should
On 1/16/06, Alphax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Axel Liljencrantz wrote:
Hello,
I'm currently writing a set of gpg-specific completions for the fish
shell (http://roo.no-ip.org/fish). These completions already feature
all the switches for gpg, and a description of each switch, usually
the
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:06:18 +0100, Nikolaus Rath said:
Yes, exactly. About 2 GB in 14000 files.
You are running several concurrent gpg processes?
[6] The exact message again (I lost it) that GPG gives you
when the random fails.
I don't have the exact message here at the moment, but I'm
Kurt Fitzner wrote:
My question is, does a secret key actually need to be signed?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but _secret_ keys are never selfsigned, at
least not under normal circumstances...
Perhaps it is allowed to sign it with a 0x1F but I'd have to look this
up in the standard,...
It
On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 01:32:54AM -0700, Kurt Fitzner wrote:
I recently exported my key pair from GnuPG and imported it into PGP in
order to get the user ids balanced between my public and secret keys.
When I pulled the key pair back into GnuPG, I noticed that my secret key
is now much
