On Thursday 27 August 2009, debianfeed wrote:
Hello
does anybody here know a possibility to use gpg key-groups under
gnome? groups defined in the gpg.conf
(e.g. group mygroupname = 0x9DB0 0x9540)
do not show up in nautilus' seahorse extension.
kgpg is capable of dealing with
On Wednesday 23 September 2009, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On 09/23/2009 12:17 PM, Werner Koch wrote:
Please keep in mind that using a user ID is just to help the user
in the most common case. Any proper mail tool won't accept such a
solution but either presenr the user a list of matching
On Thursday 24 September 2009, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On 09/23/2009 06:04 PM, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
I'm pretty sure that this will break horribly as soon as the user
ID contains non-ASCII characters (as does my user ID). For exactly
this reason I made KMail use the key ID instead
On Friday 25 September 2009, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On 09/24/2009 04:56 PM, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
Does it also work with keys like 0xCB0D4CAF or 0xAB1BC4E6 created
with PGP 6 (or earlier) where the user ID is not UTF-8 encoded?
hm; 0xCB0D4CAF looks to me like it expired 5 years ago
On Friday 25 September 2009, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On 09/25/2009 11:06 AM, David Shaw wrote:
What troubles me about this sort of behavior is that it is
genuinely good and helpful in some cases and baffling and
off-putting in others. For example, someone has two different Alice
keys
On Monday 28 September 2009, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On 09/25/2009 02:40 PM, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
0xF661F608 (This is _not_ one of my keys. Funny enough this Ingo
Klöcker went to the same school and the same university as I did.)
0x104B0FAF, 0x5706A4B4, 0xD96484AC, 0x7C52AC99
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
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
On Thursday 01 October 2009, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
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
On Sunday 08 November 2009, Marko Randjelovic wrote:
What I know is simple. I created a key today and tried it signing one
file and it worked. Now, few hours later, I cannot do anything, and a
message is wrong passphrase. I checked mod.time of secret keyring and
it looks like was not modified
On Saturday 23 January 2010, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
A while ago I downloaded the entire archives of the GnuPG-Users
mailing list, from the first message to the present. (Having this
archive makes it a lot easier to refer people to older threads that
addressed the same subject.)
Strangely,
On Sunday 24 January 2010, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 01/23/2010 03:57 PM, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
Yes, there is. The (obvious) explanation is: You didn't post
anything to this list before March 5, 2006. ;-)
This seems ... strange. It does not jibe with my memory at all, not
one bit
On Saturday 23 January 2010, Chris De Young wrote:
Sven Radde wrote:
Hi!
Mark H. Wood schrieb:
I too would like to find some way to get the word
out about what it is and why my correspondent might find it
desirable.
What about inline signatures when emailing people that do not yet
On Saturday 27 February 2010, Martin Bretschneider wrote:
Am Samstag 27 Februar 2010 schrieb Laurent Jumet:
Hi Laurent,
Martin Bretschneider mailing-lists-m...@bretschneidernet.de wrote:
I want to recreate my GnuPG keys. My question is if I can omit
the email address? Since I do not
On Saturday 27 February 2010, Doug Barton wrote:
On 02/26/10 10:34, Martin Bretschneider wrote:
Hi,
I want to recreate my GnuPG keys. My question is if I can omit the
email address? Since I do not want my email addresses to appear on
the keyservers because of spammers and so on.
On Tuesday 02 March 2010, Faramir wrote:
Werner Koch escribió:
...
Another important point is that if you want to use an offline key
you should create that key offline and export the subkeys to the
online box. Doing this on the same box is a bit questionable. To
me an offline key is
On Monday 08 March 2010, MFPA wrote:
Hi John
On Friday 5 March 2010 at 9:42:53 PM, you wrote:
Most 'Hibernators' I know are laptop/notebook/netbook Users who are
too important to wait for boot-up when the unit is Opened. :-D
Did you mean important rather than impatient?
I guess John
On Saturday 13 March 2010, erythrocyte wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Robert J. Hansen
r...@sixdemonbag.orgwrote:
Even then — so what? Let's say the Type II rate is 25%. That's a
very high Type II rate; most people would think that failing to
recognize one set of fake IDs per
On Monday 17 May 2010, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On 05/17/2010 12:47 PM, MFPA wrote:
Nearly 20% of the keys in my keyring have something in the User ID
that is clearly not part of a person's identity.
What would you say was a non-dubious use of the comment field
within the User ID?
On Sunday 30 May 2010, Daniel Eggleston wrote:
On Sun, 30 May 2010 00:58:57 + (UTC)
Michael D. Berger m_d_berger_1...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Sat, 29 May 2010 19:46:29 -0500, John Clizbe wrote:
Michael D. Berger wrote:
On a Linux box, in encrypting a file with gpg, I get this query:
On Saturday 12 June 2010, Jerry wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 16:40:28 -0400
Jean-David Beyer jeandav...@verizon.net articulated:
I see no way to do that. I have a Reply button and a Reply All
button and no others. There is no such button on that screen that
allows diddling buttons.
On Sunday 13 June 2010, Jean-David Beyer wrote:
Ingo Klöcker wrote:
On Saturday 12 June 2010, Jerry wrote:
Conversely, many MUAs support the reply to list function that
should work correctly on this list.
Perhaps so, but my Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 dies not, and it is the
latest version
On Sunday 13 June 2010, MFPA wrote:
Hi
On Sunday 13 June 2010 at 10:03:00 AM, in
mid:201006131103.01...@thufir.ingo-kloecker.de, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
IMNSHO, it's not up to the mailing list admins to
dictate where replies to my posts should go. Therefore,
the mailing list software
On Saturday 31 July 2010, Jerry wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:06:14 -0500
David E. Lee de...@transentric.com articulated:
I will be out of the office starting 07/29/2010 and will not
return until 08/02/2010.
**
This message and any attachments contain information from Union
On Saturday 07 August 2010, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 8/7/2010 1:58 PM, MFPA wrote:
Whether fully automated or ran on demand, I'm quite surprised
*nobody* was interested.
One person said they would use it. The overall reaction was
negative. These things happen. Sometimes, the tool you
On Tuesday 10 August 2010, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
Not sure if such things exist already, but hopefully they do, and
somebody could point me to them...
To go into a little more detail, I'd like to examine the WoT as it
exists between Gentoo developers, and try to work out a reasonable
way
On Friday 24 September 2010, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
I just started with a clean gpg homedir, imported one key (my own),
and then imported the full keyring of all debian developers:
mkdir -m 0700 test
export GNUPGHOME=test
gpg --keyserver keys.gnupg.net ( --recv D21739E9
gpg
On Monday 18 October 2010, Faramir wrote:
El 17-10-2010 22:09, Doug Barton escribió:
On 10/17/2010 5:43 PM, Faramir wrote:
|That may be true. However, remember feeling secure is part of
|security
|
| too, so if that feature doesn't break anything, and make people
| sleep
On Monday 15 November 2010, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 11/15/2010 3:19 PM, Scott Lambdin wrote:
If I have a base 64 exported PGP key, how can I extract the
descriptive data about the key without importing it?
Never tested it, but this should work (or come close to working):
gpg
On Wednesday 24 November 2010, Doug Barton wrote:
On 11/15/2010 13:38, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
On Monday 15 November 2010, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 11/15/2010 3:19 PM, Scott Lambdin wrote:
If I have a base 64 exported PGP key, how can I extract the
descriptive data about the key
On Saturday 27 November 2010, Mike Korizek wrote:
On 11/26/2010 08:46 AM, Olav Seyfarth wrote:
Is it possible to forward a digitally signed email without loosing
the signature information of the email?
Yes, inline/cleartext signed messages may just be forwarded as they
are (as
On Monday 13 December 2010, Faramir wrote:
El 10-12-2010 11:41, Robert J. Hansen escribió:
...
Add a new UID and revoke the old. You don't need to generate a new
certificate. RSA-4K is, IMO, phenomenal overkill for the vast
majority of users. Breaking RSA-2K is believed comparable in
On Tuesday 14 December 2010, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
Off by about a factor of 100 there. RSA-2048 is roughly equivalent
to a 112-bit symmetric key; RSA-1024 is roughly equivalent to an
80-bit key. 32 bits of difference equals a factor of four billion.
It's way harder than you think.
Those
On Sunday 16 January 2011, Bo Berglund wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 00:47:36 -0800, Paul Richard Ramer
free10...@gmail.com wrote:
On 01/15/2011 11:34 PM, Bo Berglund wrote:
It beats me why a program like gpg should detect the keyboard type
and change its language like this, language setting
On Sunday 16 January 2011, Bo Berglund wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 14:06:50 +0100, Werner Koch w...@gnupg.org wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 21:21, jroll...@finestructure.net said:
describes in detail the meaning of the --with-colons output. It's
exactly the reference you're looking for when
On Sunday 16 January 2011, Bo Berglund wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 12:21:07 +0100, Ingo Klöcker kloec...@kde.org
wrote:
Additionally: What am I supposed to enter as langid in such an
environment variable? ENGLISH, EN, 409 or what?
Try C. This should give you untranslated (and thus
On Sunday 23 January 2011, Charly Avital wrote:
Benjamin Donnachie wrote the following on 1/23/11 7:08 AM:
There's oPenPG Lite available from the App Store but it doesn't
work with my private key! YMMV of course!
Ben
oPenGP Lite (couldn't find any version without the 'Lite').
This
On Thursday 03 February 2011, griffmcc wrote:
Here's what works for me:
echo 'password' | gpg -vvv --homedir /root/.gnupg --batch
--passphrase-fd 0 --output /usr/share/file.gpg --encrypt --sign
/usr/share/file.tar.bz2
I suggest setting the passphrase of the key to an empty passphrase.
On Thursday 03 February 2011, Matthew James Goins wrote:
Personally I've never seen a comment that helped me identify the
owner of a key in a meaningful way.
In my keyring there are several keys where the comment contains the date
of birth (and in some cases even the place of birth) of the
On Saturday, February 26, 2011, MFPA wrote:
Hi
On Friday 25 February 2011 at 1:45:03 AM, in
mid:87lj14x4yo@servo.finestructure.net, Jameson Rollins wrote:
Yikes! I thought we were almost done killing inline
signatures! Don't revive it now!
If PGP/MIME is broken on android,
On Sunday 27 February 2011, Aaron Toponce wrote:
David Tomaschik da...@systemoverlord.com wrote:
How about inline confuses users who don't know anything about
OpenPGP?
Meh. If anything, inline signatures sparked conversation.
Yeah. I think we should stop this pointless discussion. I doubt
On Tuesday 01 March 2011, David Shaw wrote:
On Feb 28, 2011, at 7:09 PM, David Tomaschik wrote:
I think key UIDs generally reveal more information than I am
comfortable with. For example, why does your UID need to contain
your email address in plain text rather than as a hash? Searching
On Sunday 27 February 2011, Doug Barton wrote:
On 02/27/2011 02:04, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
On Saturday, February 26, 2011, MFPA wrote:
Hi
On Friday 25 February 2011 at 1:45:03 AM, in
mid:87lj14x4yo@servo.finestructure.net, Jameson Rollins
wrote:
Yikes! I thought we were
On Sunday 13 March 2011, Ben McGinnes wrote:
On 13/03/11 7:24 AM, MFPA wrote:
Or simply use pgp-inline so that the disclaimer comes after the
signature.
Yes, this is a fine example of why in-line still has a place in the
world.
I disagree. This very mailing list demonstrates how to add a
On Tuesday 15 March 2011, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 3/15/11 3:53 PM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
It's simple, data which may have been encrypted 15+ years ago may
still have value to the people who encrypted it, even if they have
since chosen to move from older programs (e.g. PGP 2.x) for their
On Thursday 17 March 2011, Charly Avital wrote:
Hi,
when the user's locale is e.g. French, and she/he is generating a key
in Terminal (or DOS prompt, if that's what it is called in Windows),
is the interactive dialogue displayed in French (or in the language
of the user's locale)?
Ditto
On Wednesday 16 March 2011, Mark H. Wood wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 09:15:45AM +0100, Johan Wevers wrote:
Op 15-3-2011 21:32, Ben McGinnes schreef:
That's probably a worthwhile discussion to have. Even if RFC1991
support is maintained, there's still value in migrating encrypted
On Wednesday 16 March 2011, Johan Wevers wrote:
Op 15-3-2011 21:57, Ingo Klöcker schreef:
Why migrate away? Even if GnuPG 3 stops supporting RFC1991 there
will always be GnuPG 1 and GnuPG 2 around to decrypt ancient data
and verify signatures made decades ago.
If that is the case, you
On Sunday 20 March 2011, Charly Avital wrote:
Ingo Klöcker wrote the following on 3/20/11 11:43 AM:
I doubt this very much because the encoding surely happens before
the signing.
Regards,
Ingo
In my post, I also indicated that there was a string --=20 between
the actual text
On Sunday 20 March 2011, Jonathan Ely wrote:
On 20/03/2011 03:35 PM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
To be sure that a text signature is appended without interfering
with the digital signature, it should appear in the body of the
message when you edit it. Thunderbird is quite capable of doing
this
On Sunday 20 March 2011, Ben McGinnes wrote:
On 21/03/11 5:11 AM, Jonathan Ely wrote:
The attached .asc file causes problems? I have disabled that but
still enabled the header. Why would the .asc attachment option be
there if it causes problems?
The .asc file is the GPG signature and
On Tuesday 22 March 2011, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 3/22/11 5:50 PM, Jerome Baum wrote:
Actually none of this is that important. If you can do the
division in half a second instead of one, that only halves the
time you need. All I have to do is add one bit to my key size
and
On Tuesday 22 March 2011, David Shaw wrote:
On Mar 21, 2011, at 12:13 PM, Jerome Baum wrote:
Hauke Laging mailinglis...@hauke-laging.de writes:
You know that. And the archive of this mailinglist now knows that
you have once claimed to do that. So one may assume that the only
recipient is
On Tuesday 22 March 2011, Jonathan Ely wrote:
Enigmail allows only 1024, 2048 and 4096. I have never heard of that,
but even still I would personally choose the largest key for the time
being till RSA becomes obsolete. Is there anything larger than 4096
since you mentioned values unknown to
On Wednesday 23 March 2011, ved...@nym.hush.com wrote:
Jerome Baum jerome at jeromebaum.com wrote on
Tue Mar 22 23:28:31 CET 2011 :
They go up with O(log(n)) where n is the number, or
something like it, right?
The Prime Number Theorem:
Pi(x) ~ x/ln(x)
(Pi(x) refers to the
On Wednesday 23 March 2011, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
2011/3/23 Ingo Klöcker kloec...@kde.org:
On Tuesday 22 March 2011, Jonathan Ely wrote:
Enigmail allows only 1024, 2048 and 4096. I have never heard of
that, but even still I would personally choose the largest key
for the time being till
On Wednesday 23 March 2011, Jerome Baum wrote:
Ingo Klöcker kloec...@kde.org writes:
[2. This is a digitally signed message part.asc ---
application/pgp-signature; signature.asc]...
Hey is that a KMail feature? I really like that idea, mind if I rip
it off, and if successful publish
On Wednesday 23 March 2011, Jonathan Ely wrote:
On 23/03/2011 04:55 PM, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
On Tuesday 22 March 2011, Jonathan Ely wrote:
Enigmail allows only 1024, 2048 and 4096. I have never heard of
that, but even still I would personally choose the largest key
for the time being till
On Monday 04 April 2011, arno.s wrote:
I am using in a script, with more than one of this kind of lines:
#!/bin/sh
/usr/local/bin/gpg-zip -o /opt/u1.tar.gpg -s /opt/1*
/usr/local/bin/gpg-zip -o /opt/u2.tar.gpg -s /opt/2*
...
I have to answer every line with question for passphrase. This
On Monday 18 April 2011, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 4/18/2011 1:02 PM, Mark H. Wood wrote:
Oh, sure -- I do that too. But the CC memorization problem seems a
lot easier. First, it's all digits, not a typical Base64 mishmash.
YMMV, but to me a glyph is a glyph is a glyph.
Second, it's
On Sunday 24 April 2011, Faramir wrote:
El 21-04-2011 10:20, Jean-David Beyer escribió:
...
to remember them all in any case. Even if I could remember them, I
could not even remember what login to use on each machine, and
which password went with which login so I did write them down and
On Monday 25 April 2011, MFPA wrote:
Hi
On Sunday 24 April 2011 at 5:47:40 PM, in
mid:201104241847.40...@thufir.ingo-kloecker.de, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
A Post-It is much more secure if you
do not have to keep the password secret from people
who have physical access to your computer
On Thursday 05 May 2011, Hauke Laging wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 5. Mai 2011, 11:19:30 schrieb Werner Koch:
A
period key change is problematic because it confuses those who want
to verify the signatures.
BTW, the prolongation of the expiration time has showed (by means
of a lot of
On Friday 06 May 2011, MFPA wrote:
Hi
On Friday 6 May 2011 at 8:48:03 PM, in
mid:201105062148.04...@thufir.ingo-kloecker.de, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
Unless I'm missing something the difference is as
follows: - With prolongation of the expiration time
releases signed before
On Saturday 07 May 2011, MFPA wrote:
Hi
On Friday 6 May 2011 at 10:18:29 PM, in
mid:banlktin2w8ljxyghv3_5npfbsibhrp9...@mail.gmail.com, Jerome Baum
wrote:
If my key expired yesterday, no-one can
forge a message with that key and claim it's from
today.
Never heard of a system
On Sunday 08 May 2011, Grant Olson wrote:
===
You seem to send messages from the future. ;-)
On 5/6/11 3:48 PM, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
On Thursday 05 May 2011, Hauke Laging wrote:
What is the difference between these two options with respect to
the point of confusion
On Tuesday 31 May 2011, Janne Inkilä wrote:
31.5.2011 0:10, M.R. kirjoitti:
I wish application developers would understand
a simple fact: language choice can't be computer-wide,
it must be *application specific*.
In my case it is very hard to find the place where to change this
setting
On Friday 22 July 2011, Charly Avital wrote:
Chris Poole
CAF=p9qbcmfqkvv_49a5nysoswzkh2ka_kjo5wjy2onm6yhs...@mail.gmail.com
wrote on 7/22/11 10:38:39 AM:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Charly Avital shavi...@mac.com
wrote:
When your passphrase has been cached for each of those
On Thursday 18 August 2011, Hauke Laging wrote:
Hello,
probably all of you know the problem that users of that one ***
kind of mail client tell you that they cannot read your emails like
the ones from other people. There was just an attachment which
they have to open in order to read
On Thursday 18 August 2011, Alex (via GPGTools) wrote:
Hi there,
On 18.08.2011, at 20:39, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
why should it support something strange like a
multipart/alternative message with a text/plain part and a
PGP/MIME part.
isn't this what the message This is an OpenPGP/MIME
On Friday 16 September 2011, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 9/16/2011 2:49 PM, ved...@nym.hush.com wrote:
Because then who is to say that it wasn't tampered with?
Who's to say the one on ftp.gnupg.org wasn't tampered with? It would
be fairly easy to make a version of GnuPG that always reported
On Wednesday 19 October 2011, Harakiri wrote:
--- On Mon, 10/17/11, Werner Koch w...@gnupg.org wrote:
From: Werner Koch w...@gnupg.org
Subject: STEED - Usable end-to-end encryption
To: gnupg-de...@gnupg.org
Cc: Marcus Brinkmann mar...@gnu.org, gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Date: Monday, October
On Wednesday 26 October 2011, Pascal Nitsche wrote:
Hello folks,
I'm trying to sign a mail of the mime type multipart/alternative
using pgp in PHP.
The generation of the signature and the correct boundaries works just
fine, but I can't bring it to generate a valid signature.
I think I'm
On Thursday 27 October 2011, Pascal Nitsche wrote:
Am 26.10.2011 22:03, schrieb Ingo Klöcker:
On Wednesday 26 October 2011, Pascal Nitsche wrote:
Hello folks,
I'm trying to sign a mail of the mime type multipart/alternative
using pgp in PHP.
The generation of the signature
On Wednesday 21 December 2011, Nicholas Sushkin wrote:
Hi, I think there is a bug in the way KMail is doing S/Mime envelop
for signed but not encrypted messages. I'd like to follow through,
but I am not sure if it's gnupg or KMail, which is the proper forum.
Does anyone (Werner) know by any
On Tuesday 03 January 2012, Jerome Baum wrote:
On 2012-01-03 10:59, Werner Koch wrote:
I will keep them in the file because these certificates are useful
in the chain validation model. Usually we use the shell model
where expiration dates have an obvious meaning. For German
qualified
On Sunday 04 March 2012, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 3/4/2012 4:13 PM, auto15963...@hushmail.com wrote:
Hello. Supposing I create a key with an arbitrary user ID...
This seems to me to be a simple question wrapped up in a lot of
unnecessarily specific details: How is it possible for a
On Tuesday 06 March 2012, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On 03/05/2012 04:36 PM, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
4. He has left his laptop unlocked and unattended for a very short
period of time and he is using gpg-agent with a cache-ttl 0.
I have verified that one can generate a revocation certificate
On Tuesday 13 March 2012, jpemail2001-...@yahoo.com wrote:
It isn't RSA because this is symmetric encryption. CAST5 is a
128-bit block cypher.
So its not really safe, is it?
Why do you think so? Define really safe.
@Robert
If you choose to use someone's public certificate to encrypt a
On Monday 04 June 2012, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
Also, if there are any questions you feel are missing, throw them out
too. Thank you!
An addition for 4.11:
Kontact [http://userbase.kde.org/Kontact]/Kontact Touch
[http://userbase.kde.org/Kontact_Touch]
Plugin? No (natively supported)
Supports
On Sunday 19 August 2012, Hauke Laging wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to understand how the trust calculations work and I think
I have made serious progress in that... ;-)
There are at least two things I have not understood yet:
1) Is it possible to have the ownertrust value shown with
On Saturday 17 August 2013 06:56:45 Tiwari, Ashish wrote:
I have generated a new gpg key, but I am having the below problem.
echo passphrase|usr/local/bin/gpg --no-tty --passphrase-fd 0 -o
/apploatr/.gnupg/ashish.pgp -sign --encrypt -r Ashish
/apploatr/.gnupg/test.txt
Does the following
On Saturday 31 August 2013 11:46:31 Ole Tange wrote:
The FAQ
http://www.gnupg.org/faq/GnuPG-FAQ.html#what-is-the-recommended-key-s
ize recommends a key size of 1024 bits.
Reading http://www.keylength.com/en/4/ I am puzzled why GnuPG
recommends that.
Why not recommend a key size that will
On Saturday 07 September 2013 23:35:08 Ole Tange wrote:
On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Ole Tange ta...@gnu.org wrote:
Why not recommend a key size that will not be broken for the rest of
your natural life?
Thanks for all your feed back on the list. I have now summed up the
concerns
On Sunday 08 September 2013 10:29:18 Ole Tange wrote:
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Ingo Klöcker kloec...@kde.org
wrote:
On Saturday 07 September 2013 23:35:08 Ole Tange wrote:
On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Ole Tange ta...@gnu.org wrote:
http://oletange.blogspot.dk/2013/09/life
On Monday 16 September 2013 11:57:04 Doug Barton wrote:
The way that your signer did it is _a_ standard way to do it. CAFF is
a very popular program for that, and there is another here that is
also pretty good: http://www.phildev.net/pius/news.shtml
I have another philosophy that works for
On Monday 16 September 2013 23:00:22 Peter Lebbing wrote:
On 16/09/13 22:37, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
Too bad. I guess one could do it by starting at the destination and
following signatures back using a shortest path algorithm and a lot
of requests to the keyserver, though.
Dijkstra's
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 11:38:55 Peter Lebbing wrote:
On 17/09/13 11:07, Peter Lebbing wrote:
The independent paths need to be completely disjoint (except for
start and end point) _and_ they all need to start with Philip's
key.
AFAIK, there is no such requirement in the Web of
On Saturday 02 November 2013 19:48:39 Uwe Brauer wrote:
MFPA == MFPA expires2...@ymail.com writes:
Hi
On Sunday 27 October 2013 at 2:46:05 PM, in
mid:8761si4vrm@mat.ucm.es, Uwe Brauer wrote:
Isn't the NSA a government based organisation? Surely
On Friday 15 November 2013 21:33:08 Mark Schneider wrote:
Hi,
There is GPL 3 based implementation of CURVE25519 called Pretty Curved
Privacy (pcp1).
http://www.daemon.de/PrettyCurvedPrivacy
What do you think about using parts of the ppc1 source code to implement
such functionality into
On Friday 15 November 2013 11:39:30 Phil Calvin wrote:
On Nov 15, 2013, at 11:02, Thomas Harning Jr. harni...@gmail.com wrote:
The general practice I follow is to verify fingerprint and ID separately
then, in order to verify control of email address and private key, send
the signed ID
On Tuesday 03 December 2013 19:03:13 Robert J. Hansen wrote:
On 12/3/2013 6:20 PM, Hauke Laging wrote:
Imagine a certificate which is always prolonged for just one day. If
this gets compromised then it will not be prolonged any more (at
least not by its owner but we all love our highly
On Thursday 05 December 2013 19:47:57 Hauke Laging wrote:
Am Do 05.12.2013, 19:30:07 schrieb Ingo Klöcker:
your assertion is correct.
In the first scenario
a) the key has been compromised and revoked and you don't know
that
(because your last certificate update was before
On Thursday 05 December 2013 19:47:57 Hauke Laging wrote:
BTW, OT: May I point you at this?
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=318005
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=326476
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=326477
I'm sometimes pondering a different approach. I'm quite pessimistic
On Friday 06 December 2013 10:10:41 Werner Koch wrote:
On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 21:38, kloec...@kde.org said:
Unfortunately, I think email is a lost cause because there are so
many different mail clients that will never support encryption. I
think we
Please name those email clients. I am not
On Sunday 05 January 2014 14:04:49 Peter Lebbing wrote:
[1] By the way, your statement might not even be true; how often have
you written See the attachment and then forgetting to attach the
file? I have done it countless times.
I bet Hauke never forgot to attach the file because he is using
On Monday 15 May 2006 11:04, Adam Funk wrote:
(Two apologies: this is slightly off-topic, and I've also posted the
same question to the debian-user list.)
You should have tried [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-)
I'm running the Debian kmail 3.3.2-3 package and gpg 1.4.3 compiled
from the source.
As far
On Saturday 03 June 2006 04:57, engage wrote:
On Thursday 01 June 2006 08:59 pm, Todd Zullinger wrote:
engage wrote:
Why is someone sending an encrypted message to this list?
It's not encrypted. It's just signed and armored.
Doesn't your mail client automatically display this for you?
On Sunday 04 June 2006 07:54, Todd Zullinger wrote:
Ingo Klöcker wrote:
On Saturday 03 June 2006 04:57, engage wrote:
On Thursday 01 June 2006 08:59 pm, Todd Zullinger wrote:
engage wrote:
Why is someone sending an encrypted message to this list?
It's not encrypted. It's just signed
Am Montag, 12. Juni 2006 04:42 schrieb Tom Thekathyil:
A wishes to send message to B.
A encrypts message using B's key. Opens encrypted message and
corrupts the file by altering one or more characters/adding redundant
lines of code, e.g. changes case of first occurrence of 'T' in the
code.
1 - 100 of 370 matches
Mail list logo
