On 05/04/2012 04:35 PM, Milo wrote:
> Yes - niche, proof-of-concept, poorly analyzed ciphers. Let's talk
> about those widely used and considered mainstream. Those are our
> biggest concern.
McEliece is almost as old as RSA. Generations of graduate students have
tackled it in cryptanalysis course
Am Fr 04.05.2012, 12:18:40 schrieb Rupali Chitre:
> But the same command when I call from application (Informatica), it gives
> below error.
> >>gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID AA
>
> gpg: decryption failed: No secret key
Does the application run under the same user ID or in a chroot env
Hi folks--
I'm having trouble setting up non-interactive expiration updates of a
key with a passphrase. I think i should use the --batch argument
because i want to ensure that gpg doesn't try to hang waiting on user
interaction, but when i use the --batch argument, the update isn't
saved.
let's
On 05/04/2012 05:13 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> On 05/04/2012 10:17 AM, Milo wrote:
>> Well, many expect rise of the quantum computing during lives of most
>> of us. This can trash most (if not all) asymmetric algorithms
>> (Shor's algorithm)
>
> No. It can trash *some* asymmetric algorithms.
I am trying to decrypt file from command prompt as below and it works fine.
echo paraphase|gpg --batch --passphrase-fd 0 --decrypt-files *data*.txt.gpg
But the same command when I call from application (Informatica), it gives below
error.
>>gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID AA
gpg: decry
On 05/04/2012 12:54 PM, Ali Lown wrote:
> I see no purpose though (at this stage, with my public key spread
> around a variety of locations without issue) in generating a new
> 'smaller' key for the sole purpose of being able to use GPG's SSH
> agent, requiring me to change the public key in every
>> Might I point out that discussion is with respect to an 8k RSA SSH key
>> for SSH authentication, not for email. A 2 second delay during the
>> initialization of an SSH connection is not a problem.
>
> And here is precisely something interesting: 8k RSA is discussed as a method
> to keep message
On 05/04/2012 10:08 AM, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2012 16:59, do...@dougbarton.us said:
>
>> I hope you reconsider backporting ECC to 1.4. Given some of the changes
>
> It would be a lot of work and I doubt that we can find anyone to finance
> that. In fact, finding financial support f
On 04/05/12 20:54, Ali Lown wrote:
> Might I point out that discussion is with respect to an 8k RSA SSH key
> for SSH authentication, not for email. A 2 second delay during the
> initialization of an SSH connection is not a problem.
And here is precisely something interesting: 8k RSA is discussed
On Fri, 4 May 2012 20:54, a...@lown.me.uk said:
> Might I point out that discussion is with respect to an 8k RSA SSH key
> for SSH authentication, not for email. A 2 second delay during the
> initialization of an SSH connection is not a problem.
The delay with SSH would even be longer. Again, i
>> I think I should give Werner much faster phone now ;) (on my own using
>> 8192-bit RSA key takes about 2-4 seconds to successfully auth; phone was
>
> 2 seconds are way too long. I look at most mails not even for a second;
> if I need to wait 2 seconds for decryption and another 2 for verifying
On Fri, 4 May 2012 16:17, gn...@oneiroi.net said:
> I think I should give Werner much faster phone now ;) (on my own using
> 8192-bit RSA key takes about 2-4 seconds to successfully auth; phone was
2 seconds are way too long. I look at most mails not even for a second;
if I need to wait 2 secon
On Fri, 4 May 2012 14:53, mw...@iupui.edu said:
> Let me turn things around. Other than providing opportunities to
> discuss the practicalities of large RSA keys, is there any reason why
> the agent should care what size key it is storing?
The OpenPGP parser has a limit on the size of the MPI wh
On Fri, 4 May 2012 16:59, do...@dougbarton.us said:
> I hope you reconsider backporting ECC to 1.4. Given some of the changes
It would be a lot of work and I doubt that we can find anyone to finance
that. In fact, finding financial support for any kind of work on GnuPG
is very hard.
> you've a
> Let me turn things around. Other than providing opportunities to
> discuss the practicalities of large RSA keys, is there any reason why
> the agent should care what size key it is storing?
Thank you for trying to return this discussion to the original topic.
My intention as OP was to ask how
On 05/04/2012 10:17 AM, Milo wrote:
> Well, many expect rise of the quantum computing during lives of most
> of us. This can trash most (if not all) asymmetric algorithms
> (Shor's algorithm)
No. It can trash *some* asymmetric algorithms. There are a good number
of asymmetric algorithms whose de
On 05/04/2012 01:45 AM, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2012 03:03, j...@enigmail.net said:
>
>> I suspect WK has ECC ready to go in both GnuPG 1.4 and 2.0 as soon as the ID
>> is approved. I know it's already present in the 2.1 beta code.
>
> No, we don't plan to port it back to 1.4. It wil
I am trying to decrypt file from command prompt as below and it works fine.
echo paraphase|gpg --batch --passphrase-fd 0 --decrypt-files *data*.txt.gpg
But the same command when I call from application (Informatica), it gives below
error.
>>Secret file not found.
Is that I need to give some
Hello Robert, Hello all.
On 05/04/2012 02:40 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> On 05/04/2012 06:07 AM, Hubert Kario wrote:
>> It still doesn't change the overall picture:
>> 1. migrating to ECC is hard and complicated
>> 2. using 8k RSA is easy
>
> Nor does it change
>
> 3. using 8K RSA gives a mode
Let me turn things around. Other than providing opportunities to
discuss the practicalities of large RSA keys, is there any reason why
the agent should care what size key it is storing?
--
Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer mw...@iupui.edu
Asking whether markets are efficient is like asking
On 05/04/2012 06:07 AM, Hubert Kario wrote:
> It still doesn't change the overall picture:
> 1. migrating to ECC is hard and complicated
> 2. using 8k RSA is easy
Nor does it change
3. using 8K RSA gives a modest increase to an already formidable
margin of security
Breaking a 128-bit keyspace
On Fri, 4 May 2012 12:07, h...@qbs.com.pl said:
> It still doesn't change the overall picture:
> 1. migrating to ECC is hard and complicated
Right, it will take years. But that is not a problem.
> 2. using 8k RSA is easy
I already told my opinion on this.
> That was written in 2003, nearly 1
On Friday 04 of May 2012 10:37:21 Werner Koch wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2012 00:27, h...@qbs.com.pl said:
> > decision, and that's agreed by basically anybody (NIST, ECRYPT II).
> > Especially when the cost of establishing the link with 8k RSA is
> > insignificant for any session over 5min in length
On Fri, 4 May 2012 03:03, j...@enigmail.net said:
> I suspect WK has ECC ready to go in both GnuPG 1.4 and 2.0 as soon as the ID
> is approved. I know it's already present in the 2.1 beta code.
No, we don't plan to port it back to 1.4. It will actually take years
until ECC keys are in wide use
On Fri, 4 May 2012 00:27, h...@qbs.com.pl said:
> decision, and that's agreed by basically anybody (NIST, ECRYPT II).
> Especially
> when the cost of establishing the link with 8k RSA is insignificant for any
> session over 5min in length (as is common in SSH).
Sorry, but that is plain nonsen
On Thu, 3 May 2012 23:15, da...@gbenet.com said:
> A re-think of valid user options are required by the developers I think :)
I suggest that you use GPA or Kleopatra to modify the options. To a
large extend they make sure that the options are correct (via gpgconf).
Salam-Shalom,
Werner
-
26 matches
Mail list logo
