Ryan:
That was a bad example to give you, and I DID use public encryption
given what was in the file to give it a little greater protection.
But because it contains all binary files, you don't get much from
compression anyway. I must hasten to add for the files that are
in the Quarantine folder t
Ryan Malayter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 6/19/07, Henry Hertz Hobbit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> than it took me to tar it. It also takes me much less time to
>> encrypt the tarred file than it takes to do the final bzip2 of the
>> encrypted file.
>
> Huh? Why would you try to use bzip2 AFT
Thanks John,
It worked really well.
With Best Regards
Ashutosh Sharma
Enterprise Case, Communication, Billing & Payments
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"John Clizbe"
Ashutosh N Sharma wrote:
> We installed gnupg 1.4.7 on Sun Solaris SPARC 8.
> Generated the keys also.
> bash-2.03$ gpg --gen-key --verbose
> bash-2.03$ gpg --gen-key --verbose
> gpg (GnuPG) 1.4.7; Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> This program comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY.
bash-2.03$ gpg -r "xpress (comment) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" --encrypt
/export/home/xpress/ashu/readme.txt
gpg: WARNING: using insecure memory!
gpg: please see http://www.gnupg.org/faq.html for more information
gpg: xpress (comment) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: skipped: unusable public key
gpg: /export/home/x
skipped: unusable public key
gpg: just.txt: encryption failed: unusable public key
what to do with this error-i cannot do a basic encryption of a file.
I have generated a 2048 or 4096 bytes RSA keys successfully but i m not able to
use the keys for encryting some very basic files.
With Best Rega
We installed gnupg 1.4.7 on Sun Solaris SPARC 8.
Generated the keys also.
But when we try to encrypt a file-it asks for the UID-how to provide it?
I tried providing the user ID as "xpress (comment)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
But no success...
What's the problem-where we are going wrong?
To create the
Charly Avital wrote:
> But pcsctest ends with:
> Testing SCardConnect : Sharing violation.
I think the scdaemon (part of gpg-agent) opens the card with exclusive
access.
If you want to run pcsctest, kill gpg-agent and then restart it after.
Take care,
Ben
__
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I can use the card to sign, like in this message.
Commands like gpg2 --card status, or gpg --card-status produce the
correct output and information.
But pcsctest ends with:
Testing SCardConnect : Sharing violation.
I have searched the w
--
PGP Fingerprint:
C54A C9DD 84AD C6FC D343 67C4 5195 D63A CD55 18C7
On Friday, June 22, 2007, at 12:36PM, "David Shaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 10:54:23AM -0700, Joseph Oreste Bruni wrote:
>
>> 1. In your gpg.conf, you can specify a "digest-algo SHA256" which
>>
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 10:54:23AM -0700, Joseph Oreste Bruni wrote:
> 1. In your gpg.conf, you can specify a "digest-algo SHA256" which
> will set your default signature algorithm. The preferences in your
> key are used by others to determine which algorithms to use when
> sending messages to you
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 10:43:15AM -0500, Andrew Berg wrote:
> 1. Why is it using RIPEMD160, when my preference is SHA256?
The preference on the key is unrelated to what you will use when
signing with that key (though given how often this comes up, I'm
tempted to change it).
Pick the hashes you l
Andrew Berg wrote:
> 1. Why is it using RIPEMD160, when my preference is SHA256?
Ummm,
a) A 160 bit hash is required by whatever it is you are doing and RIPEMD160
has a higher preference than SHA-1 under your present preference list
and/or
b) You have not explicitly enabled DSA2 hash generat
1. In your gpg.conf, you can specify a "digest-algo SHA256" which will set your
default signature algorithm. The preferences in your key are used by others to
determine which algorithms to use when sending messages to you. Not the other
way around.
2. Your key ID will be a number (e.g. CD55 18C
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
1. Why is it using RIPEMD160, when my preference is SHA256?
> C:\Documents and Settings\backup\ThunderbirdPortable\App\gpg>gpg
> --edit-key "Andrew Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" gpg (GnuPG)
> 1.4.7; Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc. T
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 02:16:17PM -0500, Ryan Malayter wrote:
> On 6/19/07, Henry Hertz Hobbit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > than it took me to tar it. It also takes me much less time to
> > encrypt the tarred file than it takes to do the final bzip2 of the
> > encrypted file.
>
> Huh? Why would
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 21:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Huh? Why would you try to use bzip2 AFTER encrypting?
> Strongly-encrypted data is not compressible. And GnuPG uses gzip
> compression by default *before* encryption anyway.
You may also use bzip2 encryption using "--compress-algo bzip2". This
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 08:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> 1. In the new manual the following options are missing:
>
> --batch
> --yes
> --no
Already fixed:
2007-04-10 Werner Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* gpg.texi (GPG Configuration Options): Document --batch, no-tty,
--yes and --no.
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 08:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> empty = no signature check
> ! = successful check = good signature
> - = bad signature
> % = other error during check
correct.
> and only when using the --with-colon option (why?):
>
> ? = no or unusable public key
In the stand
Hi,
Are you using gpg or gpg2 and what version? gpg2 and card interactions
are not that well tested. If you have problems with scdaemon, I suggest
to use the gpg internal code instead of gpg -> gpg-agent -> scdaemon:
Put a "disable-scdaemon" into gpg-agent.conf, give gpg-agent a HUP and
check t
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 12:42, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> PLEASE DEFINE NOTICEABLE! If it is still only 0.xx ... 2 seconds for
> your stated conditions which is multiple users with the sender using
A second is definitely noticable and even half a second is often
annoying. I regular take part in disc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Henry Hertz Hobbit wrote:
> I have done some extensive testing of FireGPG. Here are the
> results of the tests (the files will be there until the end
> of the present month):
>
> http://www.securemecca.com/ FireGPG.zip
> http://www.securemecca.c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Werner Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The sign operation is of course far slower: A single sign operation
> takes 0.28 seconds on my 1500Mhz Pentium M. Given that this is the same
> time as for a decrypt operation, this will be noticable if yo
James Davis wrote:
> Sorry to bring up this thread again but I've still not been able to work
> out what I should be doing and I'd appreciate any help you can give me
> as it's holding back my adoption of the smart card.
I'm making a little progress on this. Someone suggested it was because
gpg w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
FireGPG:
Here is the information on FireGPG which primarily does
INLINE rather than OpenPGP/MIME encryption and signing:
http://firegpg.tuxfamily.org/
FireGPG works well for INLINE encrypting and decrypting.
You can use FireGPG to send /
Hi!
I found 3 problems in the manual:
1. In the new manual the following options are missing:
--batch
--yes
--no
2. The manual has now strange gaps in it (at least under German
WinxP):
Here are 3 examples:
SYNOPSIS
gpg [--homedir ___] [--options ] [___] ___ []
--ge
Am 4 Jun 2007 um 20:56 hat [EMAIL PROTECTED] geschrieben:
> When I run the check command in edit-key mode, it shows me
> something like
>
> sig!
> or sig!1
> or sig!3
>
> What does this mean?
Hi Hardeep,
there are two answers to your question: A simple one and a difficult
one.
It's easy to
27 matches
Mail list logo
