Am Montag, 16. Dezember 2013 20:42:54 schrieb Werner Koch:
May I suggest to read the archives of just a few weeks to collect the
reasons why suggestions of using SHA-512 are missing the point. Some
folks here must have bleeding fingertips from repeating the arguments
over and over.
What
On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 16:09, bernh...@intevation.de said:
What about placing this as an FAQ in the wiki.gnupg.org?
We have a FAQ which answers a lot of questions around key sizes in
“Advanced Topics” section. If something is missing it can easily be
added.
Salam-Shalom,
Werner
--
Die
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 00:11, adrela...@riseup.net said:
compatibility, you can never reduce complexity. Less complexity means
more simplicity, thus perhaps more usability. In my experience, projects
[ You may want to start getting rid of software which is run on your
computer without you being
Robert J. Hansen:
We think...
If you're writing on behalf of a group, I would love to know the name of
the group and the names of its members. Otherwise, I can only assume
you are suffering a mental illness and are speaking for the multiple
voices in your head -- either that or else
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 at 12:49 PM, adrelanos adrela...@riseup.net
wrote:
The person who agreed with me:
carlo von lynX
Also the autor of 15 reasons not to start using PGP. [1]
Cheers,
adrelanos
[1] http://secushare.org/PGP
=
All of his reasons are easily countered.
In the
All of his reasons are easily countered.
Looking over it, my impression is that his principal criticism is, It
is not all things to all people.
To which my response is -- nothing in this world is, so why should
OpenPGP be any different? OpenPGP provides a useful set of
capabilities and
are easily countered.
I don't want to discuss them here in this thread to avoid distraction.
My topic: please give us safer defaults for gnupg
I only provided that as a reference so you're sure which one I am
talking about should there be multiple persons with that name
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi!
[This was originally planed as an open letter, but I thought it might
be better to hear your arguments beforehand.]
We think gnupg still is the most used and most important encryption tool
in the Free Software community. [1] But there is a big
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 18:37, adrela...@riseup.net said:
[This was originally planed as an open letter, but I thought it might
be better to hear your arguments beforehand.]
May I suggest to read the archives of just a few weeks to collect the
reasons why suggestions of using SHA-512 are missing
We think...
If you're writing on behalf of a group, I would love to know the name
of the group and the names of its members. Otherwise, I can only
assume you are suffering a mental illness and are speaking for the
multiple voices in your head -- either that or else perhaps you're
Werner Koch:
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 18:37, adrela...@riseup.net said:
[This was originally planed as an open letter, but I thought it might
be better to hear your arguments beforehand.]
May I suggest to read the archives of just a few weeks to collect the
reasons why suggestions of using
Robert J. Hansen: We think...
If you're writing on behalf of a group, I would love to know the name of
the group and the names of its members.
Understandable. At the moment it's just one person sharing that opinion.
[Didn't ask many more yet.] I asked if I am allowed to tell names,
probably
On 12/16/2013 6:11 PM, adrelanos wrote:
When I searched for this on search engines, I haven't found one in a
project's character. (I.e. were it's open for debate/pull
requests/changes.)
Perhaps not, but you *did* find them. Your original email referenced,
for instance, the Debian GnuPG
13 matches
Mail list logo
