On 2/26/2019 at 3:28 PM, "Stefan Claas" wrote:And maybe
another FOSS point? How about issuing Warrant Canaries?
I have seen that VeraCrypt does this.
=
Yes.
The latest one is here:
https://www.idrix.fr/VeraCrypt/canary.txt
Interesting, but it still boils down to *trust*.
I would trust
Am Tue, 26 Feb 2019 13:57:01 -0500
schrieb ved...@nym.hush.com:
> On 2/26/2019 at 10:29 AM, "Stefan Claas" wrote:
>> I have learned in the past trust nobody. Therefore I would
>> not rely on people from the GnuPG ecosystem and what they say.
> It depends on how realistic your threat model is.
On 2/26/2019 at 10:29 AM, "Stefan Claas" wrote:
Von: vedaal via Gnupg-users
Gesendet: Montag, 25. Februar 2019 22:09
An: justina colmena; gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Betreff: Re: Ok this is a stupid questions
Why do you think GnuPG is useless if you check the source
Von: vedaal via Gnupg-users
Gesendet: Montag, 25. Februar 2019 22:09
An: justina colmena; gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Betreff: Re: Ok this is a stupid questions
Why do you think GnuPG is useless if you check the source-code, run it on
hardware you trust, and a Linux variant you trust, with a Chromium
@gnupg.org
Subject: Ok this is a stupid questions
So I completely preface this question is not a valid use case for gpg. I know,
I get it.
I have a potential issue that I'm trying to diagnose. I'm trying to understand
how gpg will react to the input file size changing during the encrypt or
de
On 2019-02-25 at 14:13 +, Michael Holly wrote:
> What I suspect is that instead of erroring out, GPG starts the decrypt
> process over and appends the new output to the previous cycle.. I
> have not tested this, but will soon.
>
> I just wanted to see if anyone else has seen this happen.
>
On 2/25/2019 at 2:29 PM, "justina colmena via Gnupg-users" wrote:
That's why I have to call foul play on proprietary operating systems.
Encryption is theoretical only: in practice useless, moot, crippled,
broken, and terminally back-doored with all the malware, adware,
spyware, worms,
On February 25, 2019 5:13:32 AM AKST, Michael Holly
wrote:
> So I completely preface this question is not a valid use case for gpg.
> I know, I get it.
>
> I have a potential issue that I'm trying to diagnose. I'm trying to
> understand how gpg will react to the input file size changing
So I completely preface this question is not a valid use case for gpg. I know,
I get it.
I have a potential issue that I'm trying to diagnose. I'm trying to understand
how gpg will react to the input file size changing during the encrypt or
decrypt step.
Right now it appears that the gpg
