Re: USB tokens instead of smartcards

On 11/9/05, Philipp Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yeah, I got that fact. So to clarify: A USB token with a supported > smartcard in it. I don't know if they are supported by GnuPG, but we have several of the Aladdin eToken devices bundled by PGP Corp. with PGP Desktop v9. They work fairly well

RE: gpg and PHP (return value 2)[Scanned]

> I have frequently heard of file permissions on the key-ring > as a source of trouble in the setting you describe. PHP is > probably running a nobody or Apache or something equally > restrictive, with good reason. For other good reasons the > key-rings usually have read and write permissions

Re: USB tokens instead of smartcards

On Nov 9, 2005, at 22:49, Alaric Dailey wrote: USB tokens are a smartcard and reader in one, nothing more. Yeah, I got that fact. So to clarify: A USB token with a supported smartcard in it. Kind regards, Philipp Kern ___ Gnupg-users mailing list

USB tokens instead of smartcards

Hi there, do you recommend any USB token for use with GnuPG? I currently consider to buy an OpenPGP smartcard but the thought to have a tiny USB token instead of a big smartcard reader is appealing to me, especially because they might share the same protocol. But I think the question is m

Re: Keytypes and changing them

David Shaw wrote: > On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 07:17:01PM +0300, lusfert wrote: > >>Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: >> >> >>>Ok,.. I know that you can set at least the following flags to specify >>>the purpose of a key: >>>A - authorsation >>>C - certification >>>E - encryption >>>S - signation >>> >

Re: ECC

Mark Kirchner wrote: /You/ told the list that you "think that the guys [...] at NSA can break public key crypto quite easily". Now, that is quite a daring statement, and naturally that provoked curious questions. And now your reply to that is just "it's my personal belief"? Um, sorry, but if that

Re: gpg and PHP (return value 2)

On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 03:29:38PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 12:08:16PM -, Pete Croft wrote: > > > > I suspect it's a permissions problem: the source file for encryption > > exists, the key is correct, and the exact same command issued via CLI > > produces the

Re: ECC

On Wednesday, November 9, 2005, 2:56:41 PM, markus wrote: > Some of you got the hint, some didn't: As I said early in this thread > that my opinion of the NSA being able to crack PKC quite easily is > based on my personal belief, *just like one might believe in god or > not*. I do not feel inclined

Re: gpg and PHP (return value 2)

On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 12:08:16PM -, Pete Croft wrote: > > I suspect it's a permissions problem: the source file for encryption > exists, the key is correct, and the exact same command issued via CLI > produces the output file as desired, so in the absence of other evidence > I'm guessing th

Re: ECC

* Johan Wevers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > markus reichelt wrote: > > >> What makes you think the NSA doesn't want to decrypt US government > >> traffic? > > > I don't care what the NSA wants. > > I meant to say that, as others also pointed out, that this can mean > that the NSA will promote e

gpg and PHP (return value 2)

Hi, I expect I'm being an idiot, and will be mortified by the answer, but having searched the web and assorted archives, I can't turn up an answer so I thought I'd brave the list ... I've installed gpg on a couple of boxes (Windows Server 2003/IIS and a Suse/Apache machine). Used from the CLI it

Re: ECC

markus reichelt wrote: >> What makes you think the NSA doesn't want to decrypt US government >> traffic? > I don't care what the NSA wants. I meant to say that, as others also pointed out, that this can mean that the NSA will promote encryption that they think they alone can crack. -- ir. J.C.