-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Paul Richard Ramer escribió:
> On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:40:08 -0300 Faramir wrote:
>> Another thing to consider, is SHA is not as safe as it used to be, and
>> it it becomes easily crackeable, signatures issued using SHA can become
>> unsafe. So mayb
On Mar 23, 2010, at 2:09 PM, MFPA wrote:
>> (so no user IDs, or subkeys either)
>
> What happens if somebody converts a subkey into a primary key?
> Can they then create UIDs and subkeys for it?
Sure, a key is a key. What you can do with it (i.e. the concepts of "primary"
or "subkey") is defin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Tuesday 23 March 2010 at 2:27:10 PM, in
, David Shaw
wrote:
>>> On Mar 22, 2010, at 8:48 AM, MFPA wrote:
>> I was thinking about the "special case"
>> of users who maintain a "personal master key" to
>> collect and issue web of trust signat
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 04:09:24PM +, Rhiannon Buck wrote:
>Hello
>
>
>
>After moving servers I was having trouble with GnuPG so I generated a new
>set of keys in my own name. They work in the command line:
>
>gpg --encrypt -ao encrypteddata -r rhian...@viva.org.uk data
>
>
Hello
After moving servers I was having trouble with GnuPG so I generated a new set
of keys in my own name. They work in the command line:
gpg --encrypt -ao encrypteddata -r rhian...@viva.org.uk data
But not in my PHP code.
Are there any PHP geniuses out there?
This is the bit that doesn't work
On Mar 23, 2010, at 9:10 AM, MFPA wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Hi
>
>
> On Monday 22 March 2010 at 2:30:36 PM, in
> , David Shaw
> wrote:
>
>> On Mar 22, 2010, at 8:48 AM, MFPA wrote:
>>> The thing that stands out to me is the lack of an
>>> option to toggle t
André_Ludwig wrote on 2010-03-20
14:17:55
>I've got a secret key which is useless (ID AB756AEB) and I want to
>delete it from my keyring. This secret key has no associated
public key.
It's not useless.
Gnupg secret keys already include the public key and automatically
extract it when only
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Monday 22 March 2010 at 2:30:36 PM, in
, David Shaw
wrote:
> On Mar 22, 2010, at 8:48 AM, MFPA wrote:
>> The thing that stands out to me is the lack of an
>> option to toggle the certify capability.
> That is by design, though the reason wh
