I've used PGP ever since I discovered it when I ran a BBS back in the
late 80's early 90's. I rarely post but always listening. Definitely
time to break backward compatibility if it will help move it forward!
Go for it!
On 5/20/2018 3:28 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> Break backwards
On 1/11/2010 1:26 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
I've seen computerized votes authenticated by MD5 hash... sent over
email... in the same message as the official vote record. As in, the
attachment has MD5 hash XXX, if your version hashes out to XXX then the
vote record is authenticated. I just
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Just a quick question:
Are there any caveats I should be aware of if I generate an RSA signing
key with an Elgamal encryption subkey?
- --
Jim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
David Shaw wrote:
Ah, I recall this problem. I reported it to the PGP GD people quite a
while ago, and I thought it had been fixed. The GD was generating a
PGP/MIME micalg setting of pgp-sha1, but the actual signature was
being made with SHA256.
Found it. That's exactly what's happening
Can anyone help me out with the meaning of this error message?
Thanks!
=
enigmail C:\Program Files\GNU\GnuPG\gpg.exe --charset utf8 --no-version
--batch
--no-tty --status-fd 2 --verify
gpg: Signature made 10/10/06 01:02:23 using RSA key ID CA57AD7C
gpg: WARNING: signature digest conflict
Robert J. Hansen wrote:
Jim Dever wrote:
Can anyone help me out with the meaning of this error message?
It will help us out considerably if you can tell us more about your
problem. What operating system are you using? What version of GnuPG
are you using? What hash algorithm does
David Shaw wrote:
You might be able to manipulate things into verifying the signature by
editing the file to change the SHA1 string to SHA256, but the real
problem is probably in whatever program generated the message.
Thanks! I thought that might be the problem although I didn't know how
