What I know is simple. I created a key today and tried it signing one file
and it worked. Now, few hours later, I cannot do anything, and a message is
wrong passphrase. I checked mod.time of secret keyring and it looks like was
not modified in meanwhile.
I am really confused, sure not have
Hello,
I've got myself a DSA keypair, just two files - one being the public key and
the other being the private. I'm trying to find out the ID of that keypair.
However this keypair doesn't show up when I do gpg --list-keys. It's
passphraseless, it's DSA, and that's pretty much all I know. I
On Sunday 08 November 2009, Marko Randjelovic wrote:
What I know is simple. I created a key today and tried it signing one
file and it worked. Now, few hours later, I cannot do anything, and a
message is wrong passphrase. I checked mod.time of secret keyring and
it looks like was not modified
Hi,
seems I'm just too stupid today to find what's maybe obvious:
given an ascii armored gpg encrypted file, how can I find out what
algorithm has been used to encrypt the file?
Thanks,
Heinz.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
I made sure, both when creating keys and trying to use it, to be US keyboard
and CAPS LOCK off. After failures, I tried to turn on CAPS and change layout
with no success.
But I found errors in /var/log/messages regarding sda/hda. sda is HDD and
hda is DVD.
Nov 8 14:12:18 main kernel: [
On Nov 7, 2009, at 10:24 PM, Kevin Kammer wrote:
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 09:44:23PM -0500
Also sprach Robert J. Hansen:
Kevin Kammer wrote:
If I attempt to create a data signature using a 2048-bit DSA signing
key, and the SHA224 hash algorithm, GnuPG complains as follows:
~ $ gpg -u A39CE7E5
David Shaw wrote:
However, if you managed to generate a 2048-bit key with a 224-bit q
(as earlier versions of GPG did), all versions of GPG would
(correctly) allow the use of SHA-224 with this key.
When did this changeover take place, and is there any way to get the old
behavior back?
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 09:46:08PM -0500 David Shaw wrote:
That's not quite how it works. What matters here is how the key was
generated in the first place.
One of the numbers used to generate a DSA key is known as q. In DSA,
the size of q is what controls the size of the hash that will
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 04:24:01PM +0100 Marko Randjelovic wrote:
Is there a way to check if secret key info was modified?
Check the time/date of the latest self-signature on the key.
However, if the key data was unintentionally modified outside of gpg,
such as through data corruption, then
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 10:17:52PM -0500 Robert J. Hansen wrote:
David Shaw wrote:
However, if you managed to generate a 2048-bit key with a 224-bit q
(as earlier versions of GPG did), all versions of GPG would
(correctly) allow the use of SHA-224 with this key.
When did this changeover
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 05:52:37PM +0100 Heinz Diehl wrote:
Hi,
seems I'm just too stupid today to find what's maybe obvious:
given an ascii armored gpg encrypted file, how can I find out what
algorithm has been used to encrypt the file?
Thanks,
Heinz.
I should preface what I say by
Kevin Kammer wrote:
Unless there is some inescapable constraint on the size of one's
signature, I am hard pressed to think of a reason for using SHA224 when
SHA256 is available.
Conformance with corporate IT policies. Many corporate IT policies are
drafted by people who don't really
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 11:11:01PM -0500
Also sprach Robert J. Hansen:
Kevin Kammer wrote:
Unless there is some inescapable constraint on the size of one's
signature, I am hard pressed to think of a reason for using SHA224 when
SHA256 is available.
Conformance with corporate IT policies.
On Nov 8, 2009, at 11:11 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
Kevin Kammer wrote:
Unless there is some inescapable constraint on the size of one's
signature, I am hard pressed to think of a reason for using SHA224
when
SHA256 is available.
Conformance with corporate IT policies. Many corporate IT
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 7:04 AM, Werner Koch w...@gnupg.org wrote:
On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 11:04, hedgehogshia...@gmail.com said:
It is not clear to me if this is an problem with gpg-error.h or swig.
The same code with some context:
typedef enum
{
GPG_ERR_NO_ERROR = 0,
15 matches
Mail list logo
