Personally, I have found that killall gpg-agent works for me in these
cases, without much fuss. However, since you have a different reader,
and most probably different OS, etc, YMMV.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 11:41, p...@heypete.com said:
Also, are there any smartcards out there that would support DSA/ELG
keys? All the cards I've seen and used support RSA only.
You don't want DSA on smartcards - at least not until they are able to
do deterministic DSA (rfc-6979).
ECC on
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Werner Koch w...@gnupg.org wrote:
On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 11:41, p...@heypete.com said:
Also, are there any smartcards out there that would support DSA/ELG
keys? All the cards I've seen and used support RSA only.
You don't want DSA on smartcards - at least not
In data martedì 15 ottobre 2013 16:16:48, Kevin ha scritto:
Personally, I have found that killall gpg-agent works for me in these
cases, without much fuss. However, since you have a different reader,
and most probably different OS, etc, YMMV.
After some mail exchange with Ludovic Rousseau
If you worked in a corporate environment, would you trust the HR
department there to have verified the identity of employees well enough
to leverage that into signing a GPG key?
Let's say such an environment had an messaging system where employees
had to authenticate with their corporate IT
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Brian J. Murrell br...@interlinx.bc.ca wrote:
If you worked in a corporate environment, would you trust the HR
department there to have verified the identity of employees well enough
to leverage that into signing a GPG key?
In general, I'd be fine with that.
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 08:04:39AM -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
If you worked in a corporate environment, would you trust the HR
department there to have verified the identity of employees well enough
to leverage that into signing a GPG key?
Not without investigating their procedures.
On 16-10-2013 15:28, Pete Stephenson wrote:
I would be reasonably sure that a key signed by an HR department
actually belongs to the named person,
Although I would certainly NOT assume that that person would be the only
one with access to the secret key. Most companies would keep a copy.
--
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Johan Wevers joh...@vulcan.xs4all.nl wrote:
On 16-10-2013 15:28, Pete Stephenson wrote:
I would be reasonably sure that a key signed by an HR department
actually belongs to the named person,
Although I would certainly NOT assume that that person would be the
If you worked in a corporate environment, would you trust the HR
department there to have verified the identity of employees well enough
to leverage that into signing a GPG key?
This is the wrong question, really.
HR is pretty good about verifying identity documents. HR gets
specialized
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 10/16/2013 05:04 AM, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
| If you worked in a corporate environment, would you trust the HR
| department there to have verified the identity of employees well
| enough to leverage that into signing a GPG key?
|
| Let's say
On 13-10-16 03:51 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 10/16/2013 05:04 AM, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
| If you worked in a corporate environment, would you trust the HR
| department there to have verified the identity of employees well
| enough to leverage that into signing a GPG key?
|
| Let's say such
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Wednesday 16 October 2013 at 9:19:19 PM, in
mid:l3msbv$jh3$1...@ger.gmane.org, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
The corporation would not have a copy of the private
key since the corporation is completely uninvolved
other than (unknowingly)
I noticed that this 1.4.15 version consumes much more RAM than previous
versions.My Linux desktop background wallpaper turns blank(dark) when
encrypting/decrypting operations (which is a novelty,and that is why I detected
this problem) and when I execute the free command to analyse RAM the used
14 matches
Mail list logo
