Mismatch between binary and ASCII-armored output for encrypted message

2009-09-30 Thread Chris Sutton
Hi, I'm using the GPG command-line tool to generate test data for a system and I'm having trouble with the binary and ASCII-armored output not seeming to correspond for encrypted messages. If anyone could point out where I'm going wrong or what I've misunderstood, I'd really appreciate it.

OpenPGP-Card2.0 and Omnikey Cardman 3021?

2009-09-30 Thread Talmage
Has anyone gotten the Omnikey Cardman 3021 to work with the internal drivers? I'm having trouble getting it to work properly. I know, I should've just bought the SCM SCR335, but this Cardman 3021 looks better and was cheap. ;) The --card-status works great, and so I had thought all was

Re: Mismatch between binary and ASCII-armored output for encrypted message

2009-09-30 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On 09/30/2009 05:27 AM, Chris Sutton wrote: It appears as if GPG is putting slightly different binary data into the ASCII-armored version as into the direct binary output. Is this possible? OpenPGP encryption is a hybrid model: first, a random session key is generated. then the random

Re: Mismatch between binary and ASCII-armored output for encrypted message

2009-09-30 Thread Chris Sutton
Hi Daniel, Thanks for your reply, that does make perfect sense. In theory I do understand how PGP works, but this is the first time I've gotten my hands dirty so things are still clicking into place! The actual problem I was debugging is why the binary output decrypts okay in another

Re: OpenPGP-Card2.0 and Omnikey Cardman 3021?

2009-09-30 Thread Werner Koch
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 13:51, talm...@orange.zero.jp said: Has anyone gotten the Omnikey Cardman 3021 to work with the internal drivers? That one does not work reliable with 2048 bit keys. The Windows driver seems to have a workaround for it and I tried to come up with a similar workaround.

Re: choosing an encryption target from a User ID

2009-09-30 Thread Ingo Klöcker
On Wednesday 30 September 2009, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: Thanks for the discussion, Ingo! This is really useful to me, and i appreciate the thought you've obviously put in here. Thank you, the same to you! You really make me thinking. On 09/29/2009 04:32 PM, Ingo Klöcker wrote: She

Re: choosing an encryption target from a User ID

2009-09-30 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On 09/30/2009 05:32 PM, Ingo Klöcker wrote: Hmm, AFAIU, for someone who does not blindly certify such keys this shouldn't be a problem since those malicious keys wouldn't be valid and thus wouldn't take preference over a valid key ... unless somebody else this person trusts is trying to

Re: Decryption Fails on UserName but not on EmailAddress ???

2009-09-30 Thread Ingo Klöcker
On Tuesday 29 September 2009, nschroth wrote: Interesting. The key is not listed twice, but... --list-keys PrimaryUserName shows ALL THREE keys while --list-keys PrimaryEmailAddress shows only the primary host key. Could it be that the name I used for the primary key was CompanyName and

Re: Mismatch between binary and ASCII-armored output for encrypted message

2009-09-30 Thread Sven Radde
Hi! Chris Sutton schrieb: What doesn't work - I was under the impression that exactly the same process should work for a message encrypted using GPG. I pass in a plaintext file with the -e and -r options, and generate the binary and ASCII-armored versions as above.