Well, it's done (enough) for a 1.0 release:
https://rjhansen.github.io/gpg_wpf_migrator/
Supported OSes:
* Windows via the .NET 4.5 runtime and WPF.
* A Gtk# release for UNIX and OS X will follow
once this is debugged.
ObWarnings:
* It has the worst
Please include an appropriate link at this instructive/useful remark at
https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en/
>"Before configuring GnuPG though, you'll need the IceDove desktop email
>program installed on your computer."
An appropriate link at that point will be helpful for folks new to
On Fri 2016-02-19 08:26:12 -0500, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> I can't reproduce this. A revocation correctly invalidates any
> certifications *both* before or after the moment of revocation. After
> all, the time can be faked.[1]
>
> I tested with no "revocation reason" specified, by the way. But I
I'm trying to compile 2.0.29 and I'm running into a problem. I've
compiled all of the dependencies and, when I try to compile gnupg
itself, I get the following error:
Making all in openpgp
make[3]: Entering directory
`/home/anthony/Source/gnupg-2.0.29/tests/openpgp'
echo '#!/bin/sh'
On 24/02/16 22:10, Lachlan Gunn wrote:
> I mean in the sense that it's a lot easier for someone doing MITM to
> transparently rewrite the signatures in an email than it is to
> transparently detect that you are reading the verification code and then
> replace it with a synthesised version without
> It's interesting you're using "biometric" as a qualifier implying something
> "good". I wouldn't agree.
I mean in the sense that it's a lot easier for someone doing MITM to
transparently rewrite the signatures in an email than it is to
transparently detect that you are reading the verification
Dear Martin,
the Nitrokey HSM has an embedded SmartCard-HSM which is only supported
by gpgsm. Unfortunately you can not use a key on the device as gpg key,
but only for S/MIME. GPG only supports cards that conform to the OpenPGP
Card Specification, which the SmartCard-HSM doesn't.
Andreas
On
On 24/02/16 21:41, Lachlan Gunn wrote:
> The idea is to see whether we can make something with security between the
> WoT and "download a random key and see what happens" that doesn't require
> user intervention. Whether this would be too burdensome remains to be seen.
Thanks for the
> I haven't looked at the links yet, but what is your purpose? Do you want
> to detect rogue keyservers in the keyserver network, or perhaps attacks
> on keyservers?
Essentially I'm looking to see if it's possible to make a secure
directory service, for some definition of secure, even against
John Helly [2016-02-23 18:27:51-10] wrote:
> I've just discovered that emacs can unencrypt my *.gpg files without
> prompting for a password. IMHO this largely negates the purpose of
> encrypting files in case I lose my laptop.
Emacs can cache passphrases and expire them automatically. The
I haven't looked at the links yet, but what is your purpose? Do you
want to detect rogue keyservers in the keyserver network, or perhaps
attacks on keyservers?
There is no need to trust keyservers in the Web of Trust, or even in
TOFU (as I assume in the latter you got a signed message from
The next draft is due soon. How long does it usually take the IETF to
ratify a draft RFC?
On 02/11/2015 05:20 AM, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 21:56, br...@minton.name said:
>> Is there any way to see the progress of the IETF working group on
>> the draft Werner has submitted? I
Hello everyone,
I have a question to the options --compress-level and
--bzip2-compress-level. Which are the supportet (possible)
values of each of the options? -- Numbers from 0 up to 6?
---
Here is the description of the both options in the GPG Manual:
-z n
--compress-level n
On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 11:38, pe...@digitalbrains.com said:
> I can delete the public key; then the secret key is not listed anymore
Right.
> either. When I re-import my public key, it will instantly remember the
> card as well, so it was there all along :). I do need to set my trust
> again (not
Hi, is there a way to use a private key (PGP) to decrypt a message
without adding it to the keyring. I don't want the private key to be
written on the disk. I'm using gpgme in a C++ and I can't figure out
'transform' a gpgme_data_t object into gpgme_key_t without using the
gpgme_op_import
15 matches
Mail list logo
