justina colmena via Gnupg-users [2018-12-31 12:06:39-09] wrote:
> And now the *secret* keys are going in "~/.gnupg/pubring.gpg" with the
> false implication by its name that the file contains only public keys
> which need not be so carefully guarded against disclosure.
Secret keys are in
On December 31, 2018 5:38:10 AM AKST, Dirk Gottschalk via Gnupg-users
wrote:
>Hello Damien.
>
>Am Montag, den 31.12.2018, 12:45 + schrieb Damien Goutte-Gattat:
>> On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 07:17:21AM +0100, Dirk Gottschalk via Gnupg-
>> users wrote:
>> > Yes, that's correct. Anyways, I prefer
Hello Damien.
Am Montag, den 31.12.2018, 12:45 + schrieb Damien Goutte-Gattat:
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 07:17:21AM +0100, Dirk Gottschalk via Gnupg-
> users wrote:
> > Yes, that's correct. Anyways, I prefer using the --hidden-recipient
> > for this purpose. That prevents the disclosure of
On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 12:45:44 +, Damien Goutte-Gattat wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 07:17:21AM +0100, Dirk Gottschalk via Gnupg-users
> wrote:
> > Yes, that's correct. Anyways, I prefer using the --hidden-recipient for
> > this purpose. That prevents the disclosure of the communication
On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 07:17:21AM +0100, Dirk Gottschalk via Gnupg-users wrote:
> Yes, that's correct. Anyways, I prefer using the --hidden-recipient for
> this purpose. That prevents the disclosure of the communication paths
> with pure GPG-Packet analysis.
You do realize that, in the case of
But isn't the documentation wrong for the edge-case when you specify
--encryp-to within gpg.conf and do not specify a recipient? According to
that documentation when you only specify --encrypt-to, but no --recipient,
then the value of --encrypt-to should also not be used and that means we
would
