On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 17:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Are you saying that I should be able to compile
gpg now? Where do I get the estream library?
It is part of gnupg 2.0.6 and used on any platform.
(common/estream*.[ch])
I don't know whether it will build.
Shalom-Salam,
Werner
--
I'm about to generate a new keypair, and got a few questions.
I have many e-mail addresses and change them frequently, and therefore I
don't want to have one in my public key. (Also because I'm afraid of
getting spam.) I think this would be easier than having to update a lot of
user IDs. Are
Oskar L. wrote:
Are there any any drawbacks in not having an e-mail address in the
public key?
Not especially.
Are there any widely used applications that will expect one, and not
work if none is found?
Not to my knowledge.
Why is there no way to generate a RSA keypair in one step, like
--- Werner Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
1. Is it possible to have only one key pair (public secret pref. DSA)
that
can be used for both GPG OpenSSH? (as a sys admin of some interest in
cryptography, this is an important question)
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 01:06:18PM +0300, Oskar L. wrote:
I'm about to generate a new keypair, and got a few questions.
I have many e-mail addresses and change them frequently, and therefore I
don't want to have one in my public key. (Also because I'm afraid of
getting spam.) I think this
Oskar L. wrote:
Name must be at least 5 characters long
Why? There are probably many people who like to go only by their
first name, and have a 3 or 4 character name.
It's generally considered useful to follow the typical format for a
user id (FirstName LastName [EMAIL PROTECTED]). You are
Occasionally the console session will display subpacket of type 20 has
critical bit set when verifying certain signatures. What exactly is
this message telling me and is it of any concern to me or the key owner?
Thanks in advance.
Timestamp: Wed 22 August 2007, 08:34 AM --400 (Eastern Daylight
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 01:06:18PM +0300, Oskar L. wrote:
I'm about to generate a new keypair, and got a few questions.
I have many e-mail addresses and change them frequently, and therefore I
don't want to have one in my public key. (Also because I'm afraid of
getting spam.) I think this
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 08:40:25AM -0400, Kevin Coates wrote:
Occasionally the console session will display subpacket of type 20 has
critical bit set when verifying certain signatures. What exactly is
this message telling me and is it of any concern to me or the key owner?
It means that the
Robert J. Hansen wrote:
2. Why do you need an RSA keypair? The overwhelming majority of users
are best served by sticking with the defaults--which, in this case,
means a DSA/Elgamal keypair.
I prefer RSA keys because
- DSA does not have a hash firewall.
- They don't have a 1024 bit
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 13:06:18 +0300 (EEST)
Oskar L. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Name must be at least 5 characters long
Why? There are probably many people who like to go only by their first
name, and have a 3 or 4 character name.
Use
gpg --gen-key --allow-freeform-uid
(from 'man gpg')
best
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
John Clizbe wrote:
There's no guarantee that your key won't end up on a keyserver nor is there
one
that your private email address won't leak into the public,
All it takes is 1 inadvertent click of 'Refresh All Keys' or a well
intentioned
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 03:34:50PM -0500, John Clizbe wrote:
Alex wrote:
Yes, common sense. if you submit your key to a keyserver, there
should be some way to distinguish your key from hundreds of
other having the same short name, when searching for a key.
Sorry, I forgot to say
Srihari Vijayaraghavan wrote:
I now have an 'authentication' subkey created. I've even extracted the SSH
compatible public key from the subkey using gpgkey2ssh (which I can propagate
to .ssh/authorized_keys of the remote machines).
I'm stuck on unable to understand how to integrate the
Oskar L. wrote:
- They don't have a 1024 bit limit, like DSA has. I know DSA2 can
have larger keys, but last I heard PGP can't use them.
The latest versions of PGP support them.
- RSA is faster.
If you are repeatedly encrypting and/or decrypting enormous files, then
yes, this is potentially
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 08:36:36PM +0300, Oskar L. wrote:
Robert J. Hansen wrote:
2. Why do you need an RSA keypair? The overwhelming majority of users
are best served by sticking with the defaults--which, in this case,
means a DSA/Elgamal keypair.
I prefer RSA keys because
-
Thanks again for all your answers, I'm really interested in this kind of
stuff.
Robert J. Hansen wrote (regarding DSA2 keys):
The latest versions of PGP support them.
That's good news. Can it also create them? But there are probably still
many using older versions. I know some who refuse to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Oskar L. wrote:
That's good news. Can it also create them? But there are probably
still many using older versions. I know some who refuse to update
from 6.5.8.
Yes.
And yes, there are still people using the very old 6.5.8 codebase.
These people
18 matches
Mail list logo
