-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On Monday 13 March 2017 at 11:02:48 PM, in <mid:8a90f560-88f0-c3c8-4598-78080966d...@sixdemonbag.org>, Robert J. Hansen wrote:- > I don't > know how you'd > come up with a real-world case where you'd need a > common hash algorithm > set for signing purposes. GnuPG presumably has a reason for defaulting to SHA-1 signatures on a lot of the messages encrypted to the 30 members' keys on PGPNET. Some people whose PGPNET group messages have SHA-1 signatures report that non-group messages they sign and encrypt have SHA-256 signatures. For what its worth, forcing SHA-256 signatures with a "digest-algo" line in gpg.conf doesn't cause anybody to shout that there is a problem. But GnuPG says "gpg: WARNING: forcing digest algorithm SHA512 (10) violates recipient preferences". - -- Best regards MFPA <mailto:2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-gro...@riseup.net> After all is said and done, a lot more will be said than done. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iNUEARYKAH0WIQQzrO1O6RNO695qhQYXErxGGvd45AUCWMcx3V8UgAAAAAAuAChp c3N1ZXItZnByQG5vdGF0aW9ucy5vcGVucGdwLmZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4ubmV0MzNB Q0VENEVFOTEzNEVFQkRFNkE4NTA2MTcxMkJDNDYxQUY3NzhFNAAKCRAXErxGGvd4 5IjuAP9TeNXQReTgAda3IoJYh4b5RzgZMcRR3oILvKAlVo0RFQEA2safGRSwmmHg b9JMcHEtCHNmR25N1JFouT+Oyj3YIQ2JAZMEAQEKAH0WIQSzrn7KmoyLMCaloPVr fHTOsx8l8AUCWMcx3V8UgAAAAAAuAChpc3N1ZXItZnByQG5vdGF0aW9ucy5vcGVu cGdwLmZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4ubmV0QjNBRTdFQ0E5QThDOEIzMDI2QTVBMEY1NkI3 Qzc0Q0VCMzFGMjVGMAAKCRBrfHTOsx8l8ObICACA4cPYiqk9XkUIy0CNV5BMo4yr lLw6O9zYh2CQnC5k0A1xnVPDg3ZQLZKufuTP2DUuglKk7f5aEosGkDgm7ukQm8Il Xkx1Nm7kULTDSZwW0YAXu3IswI8pyUZIyztHps3RYzT2iRVJp2p0P3OJjHTCdfIe +nLImyOKHV442nd7ylIqbFZ0431O/KWqwFF+OSsg0VJZo0x+mAm0IY6RQuvf3DIO 90BMdh9KmPPeMd2Hm2/x5qN/p/gQhW9xWs1PH1vkDp7dM0OPUMlR4WZCbECPmLuD MewuH8XK9nG478Z1TFjH8sS2XuDWp0H32C77tkrERAMX3WM/snH7k30pQN+u =HUGl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users