> I think you might be misinterpreting the result
> you say you are dealing with revoked subkeys.
> Unless you specify "--list-options show-unusable-subkeys",
> you might not see those in the keylistings even though they are there.
You're right!
> The gpg binary only deals with public keys in
> I was trying to figure out how to do it through the user interface, and
> it's pretty clunky, with some scary failure modes. I've opened
> https://dev.gnupg.org/T4457 about it.
Thank you!
> I know that with the version of GnuPG that you're using right now, you
> can delete the secret key by
On 2019-04-11 at 10:24 +0200, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> Depending on how the utility calls "gpg", it might be affected by your
> alias and end up calling "gpg2".
Nope. ☺
Kindly note that it is being added as a shell alias.
The alias will only be expanded on an interactive shell¹ This causes
that
On Wed 2019-04-10 17:28:54 +0200, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 10/04/2019 17:24, Peter Lebbing wrote:
>> gpg> delkey
>
> Sorry, my fatigued head was being silly. That's for deleting the public
> part, not the secret part. I don't think I know the way to delete the
> secret part when you just want to
On 11/04/2019 16:06, Matheus Afonso Martins Moreira wrote:
> Public key list confirmed deletion of the subkeys from my public key
> but the secret key list still included all my revoked subkeys.
Could you provide an example? I find this rather surprising, that -K
would ever list more than -k.
>
The --edit-key command did work this time. That's weird.
I tried this with my original keys and my experience matches
what Peter described. When I tried to delkey my original subkeys,
gpg deleted the public key packets, leaving the secret keys intact.
Public key list confirmed deletion of the
* Chris Narkiewicz via Gnupg-users:
> What should I ideally do with that signature?
Export the signed key and send it back to the owner. As was mentioned
here before, and I agree, it is not for you to decide whether the key
(with or without your signature) is published on a key server.
-Ralph
On Debian, I use the tool caff from the signing-party package. It
signs the key, then encrypts it to the public key, and sends it via
email.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Hello Chris!
Well I think it is NOT your task to publish this key on a keyserver.
It is the decision of the owner of the key to publis it or not.
So in my opinion the best way is just to sign it and send it back to the
owner.
my 2 cents
Juergen
Am 11.04.19 um 10:57 schrieb Chris Narkiewicz via
So I received a public key from a party. I verified it and I'm ready to sign it.
What's next step? What should I ideally do with that signature?
1) send back to the key owner hoping that he will publish it to the keyserver?
2) should I just push it to keyserver myself?
3) what if the key owner
On 11/04/2019 02:37, Ángel wrote:
> Why should I need to remember to manually add that .'2' every time?
Because, as I said, it might silently corrupt the functioning of a
utility that expects "gpg" to be 1.4 and not 2.1. There are quite a lot
of utilities out there that parse the output of the
11 matches
Mail list logo
