On 04/11/2019 02:12, Mark Rousell wrote:
> The same thing is happening on the mozilla.general mail list at the
> moment although with a company called 'TheFork'. It has also happened
> in the past on mozilla.general with a wholesale cut flowers supplier
> called Avas Flowers.
>
mozilla.general, when they were finally unsubscribed they seem to be
unwillingly re-subscribed soon after.
(N.B. Mozilla.general isn't just accessible as a newsgroup; it's also
accessible as a mail list).
--
Mark Rousell
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@g
ive), i.e. the core service continues as it does now.
(Yes, I can well imagine that the death of the Yahoo Groups mail list
service could well happen soon but it has not been announced as yet).
Reference: https://help.yahoo.com/kb/groups/SLN31010.html
--
Mark Rous
things definitely can and
*should* come of this shock to the system. The inertia to which I
referred was and is real.
And, let's face it, it's not as bad as either 911 or a suicide. This is
bad, but it's not a disaster. And a disaster *can* still be avoided in
this context. At risk of sounding like a politician, this is a wakeup call.
--
Mark Rousell
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
enPGP). But again,
perhaps this is also a bug of sorts. Perhaps there does need to be a way
for critical non-hierarchical Internet infrastructure like this to be
financed. Isn't Eric S. Raymond working on something like this right now?
--
Mark Rousell
__
is will, I suspect, be
probably very widespread evasion of the forthcoming 'porn block' using
proxies and VPNs.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http
On 06/05/2019 16:27, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 11:17 AM Mark Rousell wrote:
>> Check your local laws first. I am pretty sure that doing that (specifically
>> the no logs bit) in the UK would now be a criminal offence. ;-) This is the
>> same as many o
ffence. ;-) This is the same as many other EU countries due to one of
the EU's data retention regulations whose name I've now forgotten.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg
u to it. (Although
it would have been nicer for it to be declared openly as an affiliate link).
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnu
Ms are widely available for purchase with no identity requirements and
can very often be topped up anonymously for cash via newsagents. As for
phones, it's been a while since I bought a new phone (although I suspect
that it is still possible to buy them new for cash) but of course second
hand ones a
On 17/09/2018 19:53, C.J. Collier wrote:
>
> In short, GnuPG can now be used to perform notarial acts
> <http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=42.45.140> in the State
> of Washington!
>
Well done!
I expect that lesser people than you would have just given u
On 18/06/2018 18:24, Juergen BRUCKNER wrote:
> Hello Mark!
>
> Thank you very much for your answer and clarificattion.
My pleasure.
--
Mark Rousell
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listi
t do this. If this was done, it would prevent your
list-forwarded emails showing up in your DMARC report.
I note that your bruckner.tk domain appears to have a p=none policy so,
if I understand all this correctly, it should not matter to you.
In short, ther
ightly and properly be
supported with maintained software.
I agree that preventing new data encryption with legacy standards is
desirable. Just don't throw other users (who need to decrypt old
standards and old data with currently maintained software) under the bus
to get t
On 22/05/2018 02:39, Mark Rousell wrote:
> Get real. These people are long-time GnuPG users and now you want to
> throw them under the bus because... well, because you prefer it that
> way. No, that's not a fair, it's not reasonable, it's not ethical, or
> it's even professional. [etc
access to maintained software to access (i.e. decrypt only) this old
data (and this project is definitely the best source of such maintained
software) then that is enough to satisfy what I perceive as critical
requirements for many types of user in this category
a.
Preventing users from encrypting new data using legacy encryption does
NOT need to mean that other users have to be prevented from (quite
legitimately) accessing archived data using legacy encryption with
maintained software.
--
Mark Rousell
___
Gnupg-users
must handle legacy-encrypted data
under the bus to do so.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
now obsolete
> encrypted material and that it can't be used to create such material
> anymore.
Seems reasonable to me, although does GnuPG 1.x already effectively
fulfil that role?
--
Mark Rousell
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http
On 21/05/2018 04:56, Jochen Schüttler wrote:
> Some people have the necessity to decrypt old data, so there should be a
> separate tool for them to do exactly that. It's the only way to start
> off fresh.
Agreed.
And I think that GnuPG 1.x provides this tool, doesn't it.
--
Mar
an make backwards-incompatible progress without
dropping all maintained support for legacy decryption.
--
Mark Rousell
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
ve the gravest consequence
> here, it's that the number one recommended mitigation technique is to
> remove cryptographic functions from MUAs.
Without wanting to sound like a conspiracy geek, removing encryption
from email would, of course, benefit Signal and its takeup.
p box with LUKS. Or both.
You are proposing to alter archival data. That's not an option. If you
change it then you've changed the archive then it is no longer an
accurate archive.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
y have to use unmaintained software is not what one
should have to expect. It would be reckless.
And, as I say, continuing to support present day archival use cases does
not mean that the main body of GnuPG cannot move on. It most certainly
can continue to
option.
[1] https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2018-May/060512.html
--
Mark Rousell
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
cept to patch code vulnerabilities then so be it.
But do not throw your long-time users or their data under the bus for
the sake of eliminating backwards compatibility. Stability and
compatibility really do matter to many classes of users.
--
Mark Rousell
_
gt; continue over another end-to-end encrypted platform, such as Signal.”
>
> Because that couldn't possibly create a Chinese Whispers style
> situation of self-perpetuating FUD … 臘
Very foolish and very slanted indeed in a certain direction.
--
Mark Rousell
___
On 21/05/2018 09:54, Damien Goutte-Gattat via Gnupg-users wrote:
> On 05/21/2018 04:07 AM, Mark Rousell wrote:
>> I think you mean that support for 2.0.y has been dropped, surely?
> No, I do mean that support for all PGP 2-related stuff has been dropped
> from the current stable
e to decrypt legacy-encrypted data.
[1] https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2018-May/060473.html
[2] https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2018-May/060474.html
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key
On 20/05/2018 21:32, Damien Goutte-Gattat via Gnupg-users wrote:
> On 05/20/2018 08:45 PM, Mark Rousell wrote:
>> I think it is important that they can still do this with a maintained
>> (2.x.y) code base.
>
> Support for PGP 2 has already been dropped from the current sta
e will reach end of life. If and
when that happens, I strongly suspect that there will still be users who
will need to decrypt legacy-encrypted data and I think it is important
that they can still do this with a maintained (2.x.y) code base. (And I
realise that this is easy for me to say since I'm not
edias is signal
> not a replaceable for e-mail, until the signal company does not offer a
> own e-mail service.
>
> That's just my gut instincts the future will share some lights into this
> EFAIL scandal.
I share this view.
--
Mark Rousell
__
mail clients
> and plug-ins like enigmail as a checkbox.
Personally I'd prefer that mail client did not provide an interface to
any "--legacy" options but it's up to mail client authors of course.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/m
kind of active change by users who do need it is a reasonable and
sensible compromise imo.
In short, it is not necessary to entirely remove the ability to decrypt
legacy-encrypted data to have the effect of deprecating its use.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://ww
cs of individual users and use
cases, are not helping security, safety, or privacy (no matter what some
of the benefits of Signal may be).
--
Mark Rousell
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
status/995906576170053633>, a
professor of computer security at the University.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
status/995906576170053633>, a
professor of computer security at the University.
(Re-sent as my outgoing server got a
"451-xx.xx.xx.xx+is+not+yet+authorized+to+deliver+mail+from" error first
time round.)
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public
Administrators group is only added if an administrator has used Windows
Explorer to look in the user's home folder hierarchy).
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg
mic and
> at times relies on unsourced facts and opinions. And sure enough,
> some of the theories sound almost conspiratorial. Still, the paper
> does a good job of evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the
> NSA's highly unexpected abandonment of ECC in a post quantum cr
sharing, and always has, but that doesn't mean that privacy (and all the
nuanced concepts that are contained within that word) has somehow
evaporated the first time you communicate with someone, or travel
somewhere, etc.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID
still do have lots of choices in
this matter (especially in the context of my earlier message).
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http
the worst.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
bin fruit
cake parlour
I think you are looking at the whole situation through defeatist's eyes. :-)
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http
On 29/08/2014 09:29, Samir Nassar wrote:
It is safe to say this thread has moved way off topic from being about using
gnupg.
Samir
Yes. My apologies for my part in taking it off-topic.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
to believe that privacy (or specifically privacy of
information) is a concept that has fadeed you are playing into the
hands of those who would wish to forcefully strip us all of privacy,
whether we like or or not. That would be a mistake, I think.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100
On 17/06/2014 15:55, ved...@nym.hush.com wrote:
[...]
Maybe an armored robotic #D Gnu might be a consideration.
Oh yes, excellent idea. :-)
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
Gnupg-users
On 17/06/2014 18:47, Mick Crane wrote:
On 17 Jun 2014, at 17:53, Mark Rousell ma...@signal100.com wrote:
On 17/06/2014 15:55, ved...@nym.hush.com wrote:
[...]
Maybe an armored robotic #D Gnu might be a consideration.
Oh yes, excellent idea. :-)
Maybe a mask of some sort
). It will give people the warm and fuzzies because it's there but
few people who use Gmail will know why it's there or how to use it or
bother to use it.
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
Gnupg-users
On 31/05/2014 06:57, Faramir wrote:
El 30-05-2014 20:21, Mark Rousell escribió:
...
Note that there is also DiskCryptor for open source full disk
encryption on Windows. See http://diskcryptor.com. I've not tested
it but it does seem to work, although it suffers from the same
drawbacks
On 31/05/2014 08:42, Johan Wevers wrote:
On 31-05-2014 8:35, Mark Rousell wrote:
All that said, Free OTFE might be a good basis on which to continue
development if the licence terms of TrueCrypt 7.1a turn out to be too
restrictive to allow a successful fork.
I think it is reasonbably safe
. lack of GPT support).
--
Mark Rousell
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/pgp
Key ID: C9C5C162
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On 25/06/2013 09:56, Bob Henson wrote:
I put it in a separate directory in the end, so I should have the best
of both worlds. I don't think I have any 32bit processes in use - but
I'm covered anyway.
If you run any 32bit programs at all (i.e. most applications) then the
system-supplied file
On 25/06/2013 14:31, Werner Koch wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 10:40, jo...@netpage.dk said:
But if you do this, the extension won't be available in 32bit
processes! (32bit explorer.exe, file selection dialogues in 32bit
Windows 7 64 bit has no more option to use a 32 bit explorer. This the
On 26/06/2013 03:25, Mark Rousell wrote:
On 25/06/2013 09:56, Bob Henson wrote:
I put it in a separate directory in the end, so I should have the best
of both worlds. I don't think I have any 32bit processes in use - but
I'm covered anyway.
If you run any 32bit programs at all (i.e. most
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/06/2013 09:46, Henry Hertz Hobbit wrote:
My personal observations agrees with Rob Hansen's studies 100%.
Even when required to use encryption people hate doing it and their
concept is entirely focused on the ciphering with them thinking
On 10/06/2012 15:03, Sam Smith wrote:
I wasn't going to say anything, but I had no idea what Mr. Koch was
talking about with that finger stuff. I studied his email and the
email header looking for clues. Couldn't decipher what he meant.
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2012 10:28:04 +0100
From:
On 07/06/2012 11:27, Werner Koch wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2012 21:54, pe...@digitalbrains.com said:
If you look at my OpenPGP mail header you will be pointed to a “finger”
address - enter it into your web browser (in case you don't know what
finger is) and you will see
Just as an aside, I
On 09/06/2012 12:05, michael crane wrote:
On Sat, June 9, 2012 10:28 am, Mark Rousell wrote:
On 07/06/2012 11:27, Werner Koch wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2012 21:54, pe...@digitalbrains.com said:
If you look at my OpenPGP mail header you will be pointed to a “finger”
address - enter it into your
I just thought the following might be helpful for Windows users of GnuPG
1.x.
I had been running 1.4.10 on Windows for some time and I thought it was
time I checked for an upgrade so I visited
http://www.gnupg.org/download/ to see if there was a new version. I
found that 1.4.11 was available but
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Allen Schultz wrote:
I think I figured ot what is acting as the gpg-agent in this newer
install. Since they dropped WinPT and added Kleopatra, the interface
changed to this (to me) annoying pinentry.exe asking for my passphrase.
I think I will
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Most kind of you Robert, however I posted my message to prompt Barry to
perhaps provide the URL which he apparently missed out of his announcement.
- --
MarkR
PGP public key: http://www.signal100.com/markr/publickey
Key ID: C9C5C162
-BEGIN PGP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John W. Moore III wrote:
Robert J. Hansen wrote:
Mark Rousell wrote:
I rather think it's up to someone posting an announcement about new
WinPT-Website to provide the URL, don't you?
Which dodges both the question and responsibility.
He's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Barry wrote:
Hello,
a new version GnuPT has been published.
New in this version:
WinPT was updated to version 1.3.1 . There were many small bug fixes.
Also an update for GnuPT-Portable
.
Barry
Do you have the URL for the website?
-
63 matches
Mail list logo
