Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 12/03/11 12:33 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> On 3/11/2011 1:07 AM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
>>> Out of curiosity, how big is that now?
>>
>> My complete /var/lib/sks/DB directory comes in at 7.8G. Not too large.
>
> That's smaller than I would have thought, but a *lot* large
Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 11/03/11 12:10 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>>
>> Not at all. Every few days the keyserver network posts complete dumps
>> of all the certificates in the system. (Or, more accurately, various
>> people within the network do.) This exists so that new volunteers who
>> wan
On 3/11/11 3:50 PM, Jonathan Ely wrote:
> Hello. I use Enigmail, so of course I have GnuPG installed. I use 1.4.9
> because [1] I can not find an executable for 2.0.17 for Windows, and [2]
> I do not know how to configure the GPG-agent. Can somebody please assist
> me with upgrading to 2.0.17 and c
On 03/11/2011 01:50 PM, Jonathan Ely wrote:
> Hello. I use Enigmail, so of course I have GnuPG installed. I use 1.4.9
> because [1] I can not find an executable for 2.0.17 for Windows, and [2]
> I do not know how to configure the GPG-agent. Can somebody please assist
> me with upgrading to 2.0.17 a
Hello. I use Enigmail, so of course I have GnuPG installed. I use 1.4.9
because [1] I can not find an executable for 2.0.17 for Windows, and [2]
I do not know how to configure the GPG-agent. Can somebody please assist
me with upgrading to 2.0.17 and configuring the agent? For about a week
I have be
On 3/11/11 2:48 PM, Johan Wevers wrote:
> How much of that is repeated automated signatures from the pgp
> keyserver?
Don't know, but it would be an interesting thing to test.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/ma
Thank you for the explanations, everone.
--Avi
On 3/11/11, David Shaw wrote:
> On Mar 11, 2011, at 2:01 PM, Avi wrote:
>
>> Thanks, everyone.
>>
>> So we can see the algorithm, but can not be able to see the compression
>> level used, correct?
>
> Not directly, no. OpenPGP just encapsulates the
On Mar 11, 2011, at 8:33 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> On 3/11/2011 1:07 AM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
>> Out of curiosity, how big is that now?
>
> My complete /var/lib/sks/DB directory comes in at 7.8G. Not too large.
That's the on-disk SKS database format, and so contains a good bit of non-key
da
On 11-03-2011 14:33, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> My complete /var/lib/sks/DB directory comes in at 7.8G. Not too large.
How much of that is repeated automated signatures from the pgp keyserver?
--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Johan Wevers
___
Gnupg-users
On Mar 11, 2011, at 2:01 PM, Avi wrote:
> Thanks, everyone.
>
> So we can see the algorithm, but can not be able to see the compression level
> used, correct?
Not directly, no. OpenPGP just encapsulates the compressed stream, so you'd
have to extract the compressed data and examine it. I'm n
Thanks, everyone.
So we can see the algorithm, but can not be able to see the compression
level used, correct?
Thanks,
--Avi
User:Avraham
pub 3072D/F80E29F9 1/30/2009 Avi (Wikimedia-related key)
Primary key fingerprint: 167C 063F 7981 A1F6 71EC ABAA 0D62 B019 F80E
29F9
On Fri, Mar
On Mar 11, 2011, at 12:50 PM, Avi wrote:
> Forgive my ignorance, but is there a way to take a given
> encrypted message/file and determine which compression algorithm
> was used (and which level)? I know how to set compression
> algorithm and level prefs, but I'm curious to see what others
> use,
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 12:50:26PM -0500, Avi wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Forgive my ignorance, but is there a way to take a given
> encrypted message/file and determine which compression algorithm
> was used (and which level)? I know how to set compression
> alg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Forgive my ignorance, but is there a way to take a given
encrypted message/file and determine which compression algorithm
was used (and which level)? I know how to set compression
algorithm and level prefs, but I'm curious to see what others
use, if
On 11/03/11 9:54 PM, Peter Pentchev wrote:
>
> All the GnuPG command-line commands and options may be abbreviated to
> a unique, unambiguous starting part of their names. Try gpg --clearsi
> or gpg --cl, for instance :)
Excellent, thanks.
Regards,
Ben
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digi
On 12/03/11 12:33 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> On 3/11/2011 1:07 AM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
>> Out of curiosity, how big is that now?
>
> My complete /var/lib/sks/DB directory comes in at 7.8G. Not too large.
That's smaller than I would have thought, but a *lot* larger than the
last time I checked
On 12/03/11 12:33 AM, David Shaw wrote:
>
> As a general rule, most gpg options can be shortened, so long as
> they are still unique.
A bit like IOS commands, good to know.
> So the real name for the option is "export-local-sigs", but
> "export-local" or even "export-l" is fine (and "export" wo
On 3/10/2011 3:09 PM, Hauke Laging wrote:
> That's the technical situation today. But it is no use to announce
> that to the whole world.
(Did you mean "not necessary" instead of "no use"?)
It is useful to quite a lot of people. Look at how many people map out
webs of trust for entirely innocent
On 3/11/2011 1:07 AM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> Out of curiosity, how big is that now?
My complete /var/lib/sks/DB directory comes in at 7.8G. Not too large.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-
On Mar 11, 2011, at 5:08 AM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 11/03/11 6:50 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>> On 03/11/2011 01:44 AM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
>>> Ah, this is what I've been looking around for! For the sake of the
>>> archives, how does one provide a non-exportable certification?
>>> Obviously
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 09:08:50PM +1100, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 11/03/11 6:50 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > On 03/11/2011 01:44 AM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> >> Ah, this is what I've been looking around for! For the sake of the
> >> archives, how does one provide a non-exportable certification
On 11/03/11 6:50 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On 03/11/2011 01:44 AM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
>> Ah, this is what I've been looking around for! For the sake of the
>> archives, how does one provide a non-exportable certification?
>> Obviously the export flag won't cut it.
>
> non-exportable OpenP
22 matches
Mail list logo
