How about a lemur? They have masked varieties (and they are cute). Raccoon also
comes to mind...
Thanks,
Bob Cavanaugh
Broadcom Corporation
16340 West Bernardo Drive
San Diego CA 92127
Work:858-521-5562
Fax: 858-385-8810
Cell:858-361-2068
-Original Message-
From: Gnupg-us
Am Mo 08.07.2013, 04:30:32 schrieb Henry Hertz Hobbit:
> Until Werner, Richard Stallman and the other GNU people announce
> a competition for a GnuPG mascot or say otherwise, the GNU is the
> official GnuPG mascot.
I didn't write "mascot for GnuPG". I don't want people, companies and other
organ
On 07/08/2013 01:07 AM, Werewolf wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 10:24:27AM +1000, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
>> How about an armadillo?
>
> Or a Masked armadillo?
There is no such critter. There are naked-tailed, long-nosed,
and hairy Armadillos but no Masked Armadillo. There is even a
Pink Fairy
Hello Henry,
> On 07/07/2013 03:10 AM, eMyListsDDg wrote:
>> now i'm finding out after moving from XP to Win7 that i can't
>> edit my keys or decrypt email test messages.
>> the passphrases to decrypt i have aren't working from command
>> line or my email app.
>> during migration i copied all
Hello Johan,
i checked that. chars are typing correctly. i keep all passwords in a password
database. i copied/pasted & typed what i thought should be the correct
passphrase. gpg2 returns "invalid".
keyboard is a new microsoft sidewinder x4 but chars/keys are mapping fine with
it.
appreciat
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 10:24:27AM +1000, Fraser Tweedale wrote:
> How about an armadillo?
Or a Masked armadillo?
Wolf
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listi
How about an armadillo?
On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 11:09:20PM +0200, Randolph D. wrote:
> http://www.pierros.de/images/Masken_Larven_Larve_Domina_schwarz.jpg
>
> 2013/7/7 reynt0 :
> > On 07.07.2013, Hauke Laging wrote:
> > . . .
> >
> >> Linux has its cuddly penguin, BSD its devil, openSUSE the
> >
http://www.pierros.de/images/Masken_Larven_Larve_Domina_schwarz.jpg
2013/7/7 reynt0 :
> On 07.07.2013, Hauke Laging wrote:
> . . .
>
>> Linux has its cuddly penguin, BSD its devil, openSUSE the
>> chameleon... Whether the GNU gnu increases the fun factor
>> is a difficult question... ;-)
>>
>> I
On Sun, 07 Jul 2013 17:19:02 -0400
Robert J. Hansen articulated:
> On 07/07/2013 01:02 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> > This very much depends on how important the encrypted information is
> > considered to be.
>
> Find me some verifiable instance of OpenPGP passphrases being
> brute-forced and I'll ta
On 07/07/2013 01:02 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> This very much depends on how important the encrypted information is
> considered to be.
Find me some verifiable instance of OpenPGP passphrases being
brute-forced and I'll take this seriously. Until then, I will continue
to treat brute-forcing as the
On 07.07.2013, Hauke Laging wrote:
. . .
Linux has its cuddly penguin, BSD its devil, openSUSE the
chameleon... Whether the GNU gnu increases the fun factor
is a difficult question... ;-)
I guess it would be good to have something like that for
OpenPGP. Something that people both like and rec
On 7-7-2013 5:10, eMyListsDDg wrote:
> now i'm finding out after moving from XP to Win7 that i can't edit my keys or
> decrypt email test messages.
Perhaps you accidentily changed the keyboard layout? Non-US versions of
windows activate those pesky "dead keys" by default. Even Ubuntu seems
to d
On 07/07/2013 03:10 AM, eMyListsDDg wrote:
> now i'm finding out after moving from XP to Win7 that i can't
> edit my keys or decrypt email test messages.
>
> the passphrases to decrypt i have aren't working from command
> line or my email app.
>
> during migration i copied all the files from
> \
Hallo,
Win 7 64bit - keine Chance GnuPG / (Thunderbird-plugin)enigmail zu
installieren ??
I have installed Win7-64bit and Thunderbird. Have I no chance to
install GnuPG / enigmail-plugin in Thunderbird? Sorry, I#m a newbie.
kindly regards
--
Gruß von W.Rogalinski, Berlin
_
On 07.07.2013, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> Nobody with two brain cells to rub together is going to try
> brute-forcing either the crypto or your passphrase.
This very much depends on how important the encrypted information is
considered to be. However, I agree that most probably no one is
especial
Hello,
for the first time in history(?) cryptography has become a subject for
mainstream media. Over the last weeks my web page got a visitors increate of
600+% for the key word "openpgp".
That's nice but crypto still has a "rather low" fun factor. I don't claim that
the fun factor is the deci
Am So 07.07.2013, 10:18:46 schrieb atair:
> So, following your suggestions, I (c|sh)ould do:
> 1.1. create one master key for signing on a save environment e.g. live
> CD, USB flash disk.
The mainkey is primary for certification (this refers to key components), not
really for signing (which refe
On 07/07/2013 08:03 AM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> Or the other way 'round: why use (waste?) a lot of bits on
> cryptography when it's much "easier" to bruteforce the
> password itself?
Nobody with two brain cells to rub together is going to try
brute-forcing either the crypto or your passphrase. Nobo
Am So 07.07.2013, 09:42:59 schrieb Heinz Diehl:
> will calculate your passwords entropy in bits. Your 19-chars password
> accounts for 124 bits of entropy, which is nearly half of AES-256's
> strength (there are P^L different passwords).
You're missing several important points:
1) AES is conside
On 07.07.2013, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> A keyspace of 2^124 is nowhere near half of
> 2^255; it's not even particularly close to the square root of 2^255.
Thanks for clarifying, you are (of course) right. Didn't think for a
second before posting :-(
However, I wanted to demonstrate the relatio
Thanks for the replies,
On 7/6/13, Hauke Laging wrote:
> That's a strange argument for several reasons. The most important being: Why
> should just one key be compromised if they are used on the same system?
> Wouldn't it make more sense to put the saved effort for creating 19
> additional
> keys
On 07/07/2013 03:42 AM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> will calculate your passwords entropy in bits. Your 19-chars password
> accounts for 124 bits of entropy, which is nearly half of AES-256's
> strength (there are P^L different passwords).
Not hardly. Theoretically speaking [*], AES-256 will fall to bru
On 07.07.2013, Hauke Laging wrote:
> Even with the default settings a 19-digits passphrase (upper and lower case
> ASCII letters and digits) is as hard as AES (without flaws).
When you take all printable ASCII-chars as "headroom", with
B = entropy in bits
L = length of the passphrase
P = am
23 matches
Mail list logo
