Re: gpgme_op_verify regression with gnupg 2.2.6?

On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 10:17, thomas.jaro...@intra2net.com said: > -> to me it seems gnupg 2.2.6 exits with failure > once it encounters an unknown public key. > > Is this behavior to be expected or considered a regression? Good question. I implemented the > "gpg: Emit FAILURE status lines in

Re: packet syntax

On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 05:29, ed...@pettijohn-web.com said: > did a hexdump of the file and the first word is `99' which in binary > would be `10011001'. I was expecting to encounter `11000110'.  I'm OpenPGP (RFC-4880) has several ways to encode a packet header. This first byte is called the CTB

Re: packet syntax

Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > the first word is `99' which in binary would be > `10011001'. I was expecting to encounter `11000110'. You were expecting the packet header to be written in the "new" format, but it is actually written in the "old" format (indicated by it beginning with "10" vs "11").

Re: gpgme_op_verify regression with gnupg 2.2.6?

On Wednesday, 11 April 2018 10:03:42 CEST Thomas Jarosch wrote: > Error output from gpgme_op_verify(): > > gpgme_op_verify error: General error thanks to Werner's hint with GPGME_DEBUG in another gpgme related thread, I was able to generate a short log file for gnupg 2.2.5 and gnupg 2.2.6.

Re: dirmngr timeout

On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Werner Koch wrote: > On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 17:19, lp...@kde.org said: > > > Proxy request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK > > Length: 58162 (57K) [application/pgp-keys] > > Okay that works. Now we need to see why dirmngr has a different idea. >

Re: gpgme_op_verify regression with gnupg 2.2.6?

Hi, I think I will fix it in GnuPG. Attached is an already pushed fix. Salam-Shalom, Werner -- # Please read: Daniel Ellsberg - The Doomsday Machine # Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz. From e2bd152a928d79ddfb95fd2f7911c80a1a8d5a21 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

Re: gpgme_op_verify regression with gnupg 2.2.6?

Hi Werner, On Thursday, 12 April 2018 11:53:33 CEST Werner Koch wrote: > I think I will fix it in GnuPG. Attached is an already pushed fix. with that fix applied on top of gnupg 2.2.6 vanilla, one gpgme 1.10.0 unit test fails: t-verify.c:239: GnuPG: General error FAIL: t-verify Sorry for

Re: packet syntax

On Apr 12, 2018 3:39 AM, Werner Koch wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 05:29, ed...@pettijohn-web.com said: > > > did a hexdump of the file and the first word is `99' which in binary > > would be `10011001'. I was expecting to encounter `11000110'.  I'm > > OpenPGP (RFC-4880) has

Re: packet syntax

On Apr 12, 2018 2:30 AM, FuzzyDrawrings via Gnupg-users wrote: > > Edgar Pettijohn wrote: > > > the first word is `99' which in binary would be > > `10011001'. I was expecting to encounter `11000110'. > > You were expecting the packet header to be written in the "new"

Re: gpgme_op_verify regression with gnupg 2.2.6?

On Thursday, 12 April 2018 12:56:30 CEST Thomas Jarosch wrote: > Hi Werner, > > On Thursday, 12 April 2018 11:53:33 CEST Werner Koch wrote: > > I think I will fix it in GnuPG. Attached is an already pushed fix. > > with that fix applied on top of gnupg 2.2.6 vanilla, > one gpgme 1.10.0 unit

Re: gpgme_op_verify regression with gnupg 2.2.6?

On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 12:56, thomas.jaro...@intra2net.com said: > t-verify.c:239: GnuPG: General error > FAIL: t-verify That turns out to be more complicated than on first sight. This error is from checking that BAD signature - in this case gpg emits a BADSIG status line and calls exit with

Re: dirmngr timeout

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Laszlo Papp wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Werner Koch wrote: > >> On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 17:19, lp...@kde.org said: >> >> > Proxy request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK >> > Length: 58162 (57K)

Re: Errors while creating an g13 encrypted container.

On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:16, gnupg-users@gnupg.org said: > g13: running '/usr/bin/encfs' in the background IIRC, the author of encfs said that it should not anymore be used. Given that, I have not tested encfs based container in a long time. I use dm-crypt containers instead. > g13: running

Re: Errors while creating an g13 encrypted container.

Hi. Am Donnerstag, den 12.04.2018, 21:08 +0200 schrieb Werner Koch: > On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:16, gnupg-users@gnupg.org said: > > g13: running '/usr/bin/encfs' in the background > IIRC, the author of encfs said that it should not anymore be used. > Given that, I have not tested encfs based

Errors while creating an g13 encrypted container.

Hello, we are trying to exchange files in encrypted containers. But when I create such a container, g13 throws the following errors: $ g13 -r 764C2156D8AC31D0 --create container.g13 g13: DBG: used keyblob size is 61 g13: running '/usr/bin/encfs' in the background g13: DBG: starting runner