Re: Questions about --throw-keyids

2017-02-14 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On Tue 2017-02-14 15:08:25 -0500, Werner Koch wrote: > I don't think that --throw-keyid is a useful thing for use of gpg > in mails - it does not really help in this use case because that meta > data is easier available by other means. I absolutely agree with this assessment, and i also agree

RE: Questions about --throw-keyids

2017-02-14 Thread Robert J. Hansen
> ... while adding another option may fix every small problem at hand, it > creates a huge one that is even harder to fix: We have way too many options > already. Some years ago I had the wild urge to set up Prolog code that would determine the necessary command-line flags to sustain certain

Aw: Re: SmartCard v2.1 : factory reset fails

2017-02-14 Thread Fib Moro
Hello Yutaka, > > The length of the Reset Code should be more than or equals to 8. If it > is shorter, it fails. What is your case? > -- > It doesn't even get to the point where it prompts me for the Reset Code: Here is what I do: When try to set the reset code via "passwd => 4" it

Re: Questions about --throw-keyids

2017-02-14 Thread Werner Koch
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017 15:27, d...@fifthhorseman.net said: > I'm open to other suggestions about how to achieve this behavior. There is an old FIXME in the code which needs to be removed: /* FIXME: Store this all in a list and process it later so that we can prioritize what key to

Re: send-keys does not update my key

2017-02-14 Thread Kristian Fiskerstrand
On 02/14/2017 07:51 PM, Marko Bauhardt wrote: > The trust level of my two IDs was `unknown` in the one public key and > `ultimate` in the other key. Trust level is not a property of the public key, it is stored out of band (in the local trustdb) -- Kristian

Re: send-keys does not update my key

2017-02-14 Thread Marko Bauhardt
Hi Peter, > On 13 Feb 2017, at 12:16, Peter Lebbing wrote: > > > An OpenPGP public key is composed of many parts which can be reordered > without changing the meaning. Keyservers do reorder stuff, so you can't > just compare two keys byte by byte and say anything

Re: Questions about --throw-keyids

2017-02-14 Thread Justus Winter
Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes: > On Tue 2017-02-14 05:28:07 -0500, Justus Winter wrote: >> I don't. I strongly believe that adding command line switches should be >> the absolute last resort. > > I'm open to other suggestions about how to achieve this behavior. I have

Re: Questions about --throw-keyids

2017-02-14 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On Tue 2017-02-14 05:28:07 -0500, Justus Winter wrote: > I don't. I strongly believe that adding command line switches should be > the absolute last resort. I'm open to other suggestions about how to achieve this behavior. GnuPG's general stance appears to be that the only way to interact with

Re: Questions about --throw-keyids

2017-02-14 Thread Peter Lebbing
On 13/02/17 17:54, Lukas Pitschl | GPGTools wrote: > As fallback gnupg could return the information that no cached passphrase was > found, > allowing the MUA or plugin to then re-try without the option that enables > „silent“ checking. Maybe GnuPG already does this, but instead of a two-step

Re: Questions about --throw-keyids

2017-02-14 Thread Justus Winter
Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes: > [ Unknown signature status ] > On Mon 2017-02-13 11:54:04 -0500, Lukas Pitschl | GPGTools wrote: >>> Am 13.02.2017 um 17:34 schrieb Daniel Kahn Gillmor : >>> >>> On Mon 2017-02-13 06:41:51 -0500, Bjarni Runar