On 15 December 2014 at 19:40, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> Keybase (https://keybase.io) is trying to solve the Web of Trust problem
> in a new way. They're currently in beta, but I was able to snag an
> invitation. (I have no invites to give out, unfortunately.) The following
> is just a write-up
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 01:40:22PM -0500, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> Keybase (https://keybase.io) is trying to solve the Web of Trust problem in
>> a new way. They're currently in beta, but I was able to snag an invitation.
>> (I have no inv
watched the video, its amazing how much is broken and that GPG and OTR are not.
> On Dec 31, 2014, at 5:20 AM, Nicolai Josuttis wrote:
>
> OK,
> for those who didn't have time to see the talk at 31C3
> as a whole and therefore wondering why this is an important talk,
> let me point out and quot
Am 02.01.2015 um 20:34 schrieb Egon:
Hi All!
I want to symmetrically encrypt many hundreds of files under Linux, the
files stored in many subdirectories. I am looking for a shell script
which can do it for me. What is the simplest way to do it?
You might want to look at gpgdir: https://cipherd
If you can get a list (comma, space separated) of the files, bash
would do it nicely?
whatever you do, you'll need that?
then obtain the basename, $bn and use a for each on the list?
HTH
On 2 January 2015 at 19:34, Egon wrote:
> Hi All!
>
> I want to symmetrically encrypt many hundreds of file
Hi All!
I want to symmetrically encrypt many hundreds of files under Linux, the
files stored in many subdirectories. I am looking for a shell script
which can do it for me. What is the simplest way to do it?
Best regards, Egon
___
Gnupg-users mail
On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 18:07:40 +0100, Peter Lebbing
wrote:
On 02/01/15 17:11, Peter Lebbing wrote:
it would increase the size of the public key by at least 13
characters
(making it 50% longer) but it seems a good tradeoff to me.
Minor nitpick: I meant 12 characters. I didn't want to think abou
On 02/01/15 21:29, sben1783 wrote:
> Maybe this isn't such a common use case, but I think for me it would perfectly
> make sense;)
No, I don't think this will become a feature :). However, if your OS is Linux or
something with the same "scripting power", you could simply have your script
create a
On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 17:14:22 +0100, Peter Lebbing
wrote:
[...]
What feature are you asking for? It seems to me it doesn't need a
feature,
doesn't need explicit support. You write a copy of the key to the
same directory
as where you store the encrypted files. You write a script that
fetches
On 02/01/15 17:11, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> it would increase the size of the public key by at least 13 characters
> (making it 50% longer) but it seems a good tradeoff to me.
Minor nitpick: I meant 12 characters. I didn't want to think about it and simply
used 'echo 12345678|base64|wc' but that inc
On 31/12/14 22:09, Sandeep Murthy wrote:
> This is clearly a bug, and surely there’s an easy fix for it
I respectfully disagree on both. Editing a revoked key might not have a use, but
editing an expired key is perfectly valid, i.e., to extend its expiry date.
The matching behaviour is also clear
On 02/01/15 17:04, Ben Staude wrote:
> Another thought would be to just paste the private key (encrypted by my
> password) to the gpg'd files? Of course my private key would then be sort of
> "public", but still it is as secure as using symmetric encryption with that
> password in the first place (
On 02/01/15 13:14, sben1783 wrote:
> What I'd like to do is: create a public key so that the corresponding private
> key equals my given password.
This is possible with elliptic curve cryptography, although you should realise
that a passphrase usually contains a lot less entropy than a private key
[...]
Another thought: You could generate a Keypair with a keysize small enough to
remember als a password but then I think the key size is that small it won't
be secure anymore.
Would a key size matching the size of my password (say, 15 characters)
be less secure than symmetric encryption wi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Friday 2 January 2015 at 2:13:53 PM, in
, Ben Staude wrote:
> But as I mentioned I don't want to
> depend on a private key stored somewhere, but I'd like
> to use my password as the private key. I would need a
> keypair where the public ke
On Friday 02 January 2015 15:13:53 Ben Staude wrote:
> [...]
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > you can use the asymmetric variant: Generate a encryption key pair, store
> > the private key on your save place and the public key on your computer.
> > Then you can encrypt files without any password and decrypt the
[...]
Hi,
you can use the asymmetric variant: Generate a encryption key pair, store the
private key on your save place and the public key on your computer. Then you
can encrypt files without any password and decrypt them using your private key.
Dies this describe your purpose, except the fact
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Thursday 1 January 2015 at 5:10:48 PM, in
, Linux Debian wrote:
> those 2 expired subkeys still appear
That should be the case. But the key you attached has only one subkey
(0x1181AAE315915635), and that is all I can see in the web interfa
On Friday 02 January 2015 13:14:26 sben1783 wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> maybe this question is completely stupid and only shows I didn't
> understand anything about encryption, but anyway I'm really curious:
>
> I want to store some of my private files encrypted on my NAS. Until
> now, I'm using --
On 02-01-2015 13:26, Werner Koch wrote:
> The run again and check that file. It may give some more clues on the
> error location.
This is the output generated to the log file:
2015-01-02 14:51:30 gpg-agent[8956] listening on socket
'C:/Users/JesperHess/AppData/Roaming/gnupg/S.gpg-agent'
2015-01
Hi all,
maybe this question is completely stupid and only shows I didn't
understand anything about encryption, but anyway I'm really curious:
I want to store some of my private files encrypted on my NAS. Until
now, I'm using --symmetric for encryption with a (think so) strong
password that I
On Fri, 2 Jan 2015 11:33, jes...@graffen.dk said:
> gpg: key 0x416C5A0DD9FA2EE5/0x416C5A0DD9FA2EE5: error sending to agent:
> End of file
Can you please enable logging for the gpg-agent? You may either use
GPA's backend preferences to do this or use a text editor to change or
create gpg-agent.c
Hi all!
I just installed the latest GnuPG 2.1.1 on my main Windows PC and tried
to import my private key. However, it fails with a message from gpg-agent:
gpg: key 0x416C5A0DD9FA2EE5/0x416C5A0DD9FA2EE5: error sending to agent:
End of file
gpg: error building skey array: End of file
In the Window
Hi all!
I just installed the latest GnuPG 2.1.1 on my main Windows PC and tried
to import my private key. However, it fails with a message from gpg-agent:
gpg: key 0x416C5A0DD9FA2EE5/0x416C5A0DD9FA2EE5: error sending to agent:
End of file
gpg: error building skey array: End of file
In the Window
24 matches
Mail list logo
