Re: Multiple Keyrings WAS Signing multiple keys

2011-08-27 Thread Werner Koch
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 00:46, sand...@crustytoothpaste.net said:

 dpkg-source would lose the ability to verify packages before unpacking
 them.  apt's archive verification would break.  That doesn't include

Wrong.  It uses gpgv which is a verification only tool; is uses a list
of trusted keys (i.e. the debian keyring).  That is the simplest and
most straightforward way for verification.  I actually developed it for
debian.


Shalom-Salam,

   Werner

-- 
Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.


___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users


Any news on a gpg4win update?

2011-08-27 Thread Doug Barton
I use gpg4win on my windows systems, and I can live with the gnupg
version being a little stale. But I'm trying really hard to like
claws-mail, and they just release a new version today making the one in
gpg4 win 2 versions behind the curve. Maybe you were just waiting for
today's claws release? :)


Doug

-- 

Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go

Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/


___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users


Re: Signing multiple keys

2011-08-27 Thread Nicholas Cole
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Doug Barton do...@dougbarton.us wrote:

 I have a particular concern that if I sign a key with I checked
 carefully that I really did. Moreover, I have a philosophical prejudice
 that if I *can't* say I checked carefully, why bother?

 That said, I have in the past run across people who still have old
 e-mail addresses that they no longer have access to on their keys, so
 it's more than a theoretical issue, for me at least.

I see. So your procedure is to check that the name on the key matches
some ID, and THEN check separately that the key at least appears to
control the email addresses it claims.

Which does make a certain sense, I can see. :-)

Thank you for explaining.

Best wishes,

Nicholas

___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users