D/B00BFACE 2010-10-11
> uid SOMEPLACE
> sub 1024g/6820 2010-10-11
Just run gpg on the file (i.e. "gpg my-base-64-exported-key.asc"). No special
arguments needed.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
I will be out of the office starting 11/12/2010 and will not return until
11/15/2010.
**
This message and any attachments contain information from Union Pacific which
may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribut
Hi,
How do I turn off all messaging form the gpg program
Eg.
gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit ELG-E etc...
gpg: Warning: message was not integrity protected
Thanks
David J.
<>___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnu
Hi,
I have a gpg encypted string in a data field and I want to be able decrypt
it.
Is there a simple way to do this without writing it to a file on a windows
machine
Here is my code example:
With this code I get: Invalid Option "-BEGIN" which I understand why.
regar
gards,
David j.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On Nov 7, 2010, at 6:19 PM, Morten Gulbrandsen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> David Shaw wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> This isn't a GnuPG bug per se, but given that many (most?) people using
>> GnuPG have it li
xt> specifies
> the IDs of symmetric algorithms, and RFC5581
> <http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5581.txt> specifies the IDs for the
> Camellia cipher.
If you ever need a handy reference for which algorithm maps to which number,
just run "gpg -v --version". It will
On Oct 21, 2010, at 5:26 PM, MFPA wrote:
> Is there a maximum length for an OpenPGP UID?
Yes, but it's huge: 4,294,967,295 characters long. That's the OpenPGP answer.
In practice, however, using GnuPG, the maximum is 2048 chara
since he's working off a copy that still has the session key encrypted
to him.
Note that this isn't a problem specific to stripping a single key from a file.
The same problem exists when re-encrypting to the remaining people. Either
way, if Alice makes a copy before you strip or re-encr
rrect. Setting force-v3-sigs *disables*
ask-sig-expire, sig-policy-url, etc.
> The attached patch clarifies things to my current understanding of them
> (but i might be wrong!)
I've applied something similar (also fixing ask-sig-expi
Jameson Rollins wrote:
> We should be careful not to overstate the impatience of users too much.
> I've seen plenty of people wait many seconds for google maps to load on
> phones without giving up on the whole process. I also have an extremely
> slow machine were I routinely have to wait a long t
On Sep 24, 2010, at 2:52 PM, Phil Brooke wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, David Shaw wrote:
>> There is actually a defined field for this in OpenPGP (see section 5.2.3.22,
>> Signer's User ID). I don't think anyone implements it though.
>
> Is there any particular
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> David Smith wrote:
>> Not truly "quantitative", but I notice a significant difference
>> between encrypting emails to people with 1024-bit keys vs people with
>> 4096-bit keys. I'd say that the difference is in the order 3-6
>> s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Smith wrote:
> Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>> On 09/24/2010 09:54 AM, David Shaw wrote:
>>> It won't work with the current generation of OpenPGP smartcards.
>>> It also will be dreadfully slow if you (or someon
ead. People on smartphones don't just verify
signatures :)
"Dreadfully" is a difficult thing to enumerate anyway. For me, FWIW, it would
be "over 1-2 seconds".
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On 09/24/2010 09:54 AM, David Shaw wrote:
>> It won't work with the current generation of OpenPGP smartcards. It also
>> will be dreadfully slow if you (or someone you are communicating with) ever
>> uses the key on a small machine (think
On Sep 24, 2010, at 12:47 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On 09/24/2010 11:53 AM, David Shaw wrote:
>> There is actually a defined field for this in OpenPGP (see section 5.2.3.22,
>> Signer's User ID). I don't think anyone implements it though.
>
>
r, testing right now, it doesn't seem to work with gpg for regular
> data signatures:
>
> echo test | gpg --sign --set-notation 't...@example.org=test' | \
> gpg --list-packets
>
> does not show the notation :(
It works for me. I even cut and paste your exact comm
a small machine (think smart phone). If you are usually on a "full
power" computer, then they generally have the CPU to spare for this sort of
thing, and you'll rarely if ever notice a difference.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
rsion" (or
"gpg --version"). If you see "BZIP2" on the "Compression" line, then you are
linked with libbz2.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
up in the
> local gpg configuration?
>
> Does anyone know how I can do this?
Do you have the public key corresponding to the card key on that box? You need
the public key plus a run of --card-status to generate the stubs.
David
___
On 08/27/2010 04:36 AM, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Thursday 26 August 2010 16:52:24 David Mohr wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I recently bought a gnupg smart card (kudos to the organizers of
>> Froscon). I own an internal smart card reader made by akasa (AK-ICR-05).
>> Unfortunately it
eatly appreciated!
Thanks,
~David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
hat is it supposed to do.
In English, it is "N" for "next". If there are many results from the
keyserver, N is used to go to the next page of responses. The maximum number
of results on a page varies depending on the window size, but it will never be
smaller than 24.
David
ction 11.3, which gives the various legal
packet combinations.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
t
anyway.
> Is there also a way to detect the encryption algorithm on a file? Any help
> with these questions is appreciated.
Try gpg --list-packets, or decrypting with "-v" set.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.
rt of the process. If you want to change a policy
URL or notation after it has been issued, you can simply delete the old sig
(even a self-sig can be deleted) and re-issue it.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
;t change code.
Instead, just make a symlink from "gpg" to "gpg2". Much simpler and you don't
need to deal with renaming keyserver helpers, or re-patching the code every
time a new release is made, etc.
David
___
Gnupg-user
n in security software. Either a protection is strong or it
is not, and we should not pretend otherwise.
The only way to properly implement the flag is on the server side. I'd rather
work towards that real answer than do something weak on the client side.
David
_
uploading it to
the keyservers using the web. It would have been an illusion of actual
functionality.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Snaky Love wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> thank you very much for your explanation!
>
> May I ask a few final questions about this issue:
>
> - are there any tools at all that handle the "group crypto + archive"
> use-case satisfactory? (Yes, PM me your ads :)
> -
Right Thing to do is to ask the sender to start using a MDC. If that isn't
possible, then --no-mdc-warning will make the warning on the recipient side go
away.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Snaky Love wrote:
> Hi,
>
> thank you very much for the interesting discussion.
>
> About GSWoT - does this cover my described use-case? I don´t quite get
> it from a first glance on the website...
Well, I've only just learned about it by reading the website, but...
Not really.
>From what I
I will be out of the office starting 07/29/2010 and will not return until
08/02/2010.
**
This message and any attachments contain information from Union Pacific which
may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribut
blem you are having is that PGP version 6.5 is beyond
antique at this point. You might try adding the "--pgp6" flag to your gpg
invocation, which enables some workarounds for various PGP 6-isms, but
basically the problem is that PGP 6.5 predates th
correct order, but a while ago there was a
thread about this and I would like to find it.
- --
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jerseyhttp://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 17:10:01 up 16 days, 1
ID you are signing correctly represents the owner of the key. If you
don't check the email address, you can't really affirm that.
Not everyone checks. I believe they should.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
m...@proseconsulting.co.uk wrote:
> I need to be able to ultimately trust a public key in batch mode, that I
> have downloaded automatically with wget from an internal server over HTTPS.
>
> I don't want to do --trust-model always, apart from the fact I want to
> use a trusted key anyway, gpg --tr
h the point where you're relying on
plausible deniability to save you, you're already in deep trouble.)
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
to a key-server. Then notify whoever sent you the
original message of the problem and to send it again with the new key.
You might wish to revoke the old key-pair if you have a revocation
certificate on your machine.
I do not know how you lost your secret key.
- --
.~. Jean-David Beyer R
etter with
changing the expiration date. If you want to take this opportunity to make a
larger key, then you could re-issue.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
.x) package to replace it. This breaks all sorts of scripts and things
that were written to use 1.4.x.
A few people are trying to get this fixed in Fedora.
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-July/138765.html
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-July/138781.html
Dav
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Breen Mullins wrote:
> * Jean-David Beyer [2010-07-20 14:53 -0400]:
>
>> John Espiro wrote:
>>> Greetings...
>>> My google skills must not be working lately... Can anyone help point me
>>> to the 2.0.16 b
ck option.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
4.5-14.el5_5.1.
If I look at CentOS 4, the binary for it is gnupg-1.2.6-9.i386.rpm
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jerseyhttp://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 14:45:01 up 12 days, 23:31,
uld be
> used?
There isn't a direct way to do this. GnuPG tries to decrypt the various
encrypted session keys in order, so you'll get prompted for them in order.
If you want to always have B before A, try switching the "-r" arguments when
you
On Jul 6, 2010, at 11:06 AM, David Smith wrote:
> Robert wrote:
>> 7) I assume the key rings themselves, holding the keys, are encrypted.
>> How strong is this encryption in GPG? What algorithm is used, etc? One
>> requirement is about compromising the machine with the keys,
Robert wrote:
> 7) I assume the key rings themselves, holding the keys, are encrypted.
> How strong is this encryption in GPG? What algorithm is used, etc? One
> requirement is about compromising the machine with the keys, how easy it
> would be to export the keys. Since the keyring is physically l
Robert wrote:
> Hi, we're using GnuPG 1.4.5 to encrypt and store sensitive files at
> work. We have been given some requirements to comply with, spawning some
> general questions. I tried searching in help files but haven't found
> answers to everything so I'm trying here. If this questions are ask
There are a few ways to handle it, but as with most things, the best answer
depends on the fine details of your situation.
David
>
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On Jun 28, 2010, at 12:47 AM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2010, David Shaw wrote:
>
>>>>> However, you raise another question: How does a keyserver know who is
>>>>> uploading the key?
>>>>
>>>> At the mome
On Jun 27, 2010, at 9:23 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2010, David Shaw wrote:
>
>> On Jun 27, 2010, at 7:50 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
>>
>>>>>> It's effectively a no-op though, as no server supports it.
>>>
r
them.
> However, you raise another question: How does a keyserver know who is
> uploading the key?
At the moment, it doesn't. That would need to be addressed if you want
keyservers to be able to reject a no-ks-modify key. One way to do it is to
only accept key updates that are signed by
On Jun 27, 2010, at 4:27 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2010, David Shaw wrote:
>
>> On Jun 27, 2010, at 3:58 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> How difficult would it be to propose some kind of exte
u like.
It's effectively a no-op though, as no server supports it.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
"?
Not directly, but you can do something like this:
gpg --recv-keys `gpg --with-colons --fixed-list-mode --list-sigs $THE_KEY |
egrep '^sig:' | cut -f5 -d: | sort -u`
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On Jun 22, 2010, at 11:25 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> On 6/22/10 10:39 PM, David Shaw wrote:
>> I'm not sure about the 2007 patent expiration - I recall it being
>> right around now, actually (2010-2011).
>
> A little digging around revealed the United States pate
d to answer since you seem to be reporting behavior (signatures from keys
that have no trust value being stripped off) that is not in accordance with
what I'm seeing. What version of GPG are you seeing it on? Can you
demonstrate the problem?
> 2) If I find the magic way to do #1, and
to see much PGP 2.x
usage these days. OpenPGP even explicitly rejects making new PGP 2.x-style
keys.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On Jun 22, 2010, at 9:51 AM, Jameson Rollins wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 09:27:46 -0400, David Shaw wrote:
>> On Jun 22, 2010, at 2:36 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>>>> Can you elaborate on the usage you're describing?
>>>
>>> I'm thinking
On Jun 22, 2010, at 12:25 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On 06/21/2010 06:32 PM, David Shaw wrote:
>> On Jun 21, 2010, at 6:11 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
>>
>>> I see that there is currently the import-option "import-local-sigs"
>>> which obviously all
e has not only to worry about
keeping her linkage secret herself, but she also has to worry about Charlie
keeping her linkage secret.
In the above scenario, it seems more reasonable for Charlie to locally sign
Bob's key himself on Alice's say-so.
David
_
; would only allow import of local signatures where the corresponding
> secret key was already available, and for this behavior to be the default.
Not only is it reasonable, it is already the case :)
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing lis
ntinue with the requested operations.
The danger here is that it might take a long time (minutes+) to realize that
the keyserver and/or network wasn't going to cooperate. This could seriously
slow down many GPG operations.
David
___
Gnupg-user
e keyservers to actually
do crypto (rather than be the easier packet stores), which requires a pretty
dramatic change in the keyservers themselves.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> Well, the stuff I get from the Gnupg-users@gnupg.org list has
> "precedence: list" set. Other lists to which I subscribe use "Precedence
> normal" or "precedence: bulk". Regular e-mail does not have precedence
> set at all. It
"multiple signer" trick with regular --sign
> if you want the data and signatures to be put together into a single file.
On Jun 18, 2010, at 9:14 AM, Boris wrote:
> Ok, Thanks David,
>
> But what if the file is signed by people working on different computers?
> So th
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> David Smith wrote:
>> Mailing lists programs normally send mails with the "Precedence: bulk"
>> or "Precedence: junk" header, and then the autoresponder should
>> recognise this and choose not to respond to mails with the "b
David Smith wrote:
> Jean-David Beyer wrote:
>> If I understand correctly, this is done by setting the precedence of the
>> vacation e-mail to "bulk" instead of something else ("list"?), and that
>> mailing list programs do not send the stuff marked
data and signatures to be put together into a single file.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
ulk.
Is that not how mailing list programs work?
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jerseyhttp://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 08:20:01 up 42 days, 16:15, 3 users, load average: 4.65,
Gorugantu, Prakash wrote:
> Our project has a requirement where we need to pull a file using PGP
> encryption/decryption from one of our clients ftp servers. Please let us
> know if we can use GNUPG to encrypt/decrypt files with PGP. We read
> somewhere in your licensing agreement that GNUPG for P
Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> On Sunday 13 June 2010, Jean-David Beyer wrote:
>> Ingo Klöcker wrote:
>>> On Saturday 12 June 2010, Jerry wrote:
>>>> Conversely, many MUAs support the "reply to list" function that
>>>> should work correctly on this list.
Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> On Saturday 12 June 2010, Jerry wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 16:40:28 -0400
>>
>> Jean-David Beyer articulated:
>>> I see no way to do that. I have a Reply button and a Reply All
>>> button and no others. There is no such button
diddling buttons. Thunderbird 2.0.0.16, which is the latest for Red Hat
Enterprise Linux 5.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jerseyhttp://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 16:35:01 up 37 day
uot; feature in several MTAs.
Yes, I did. They will not accept anything from my MTA even when I use
the smarthost feature. I can use either their web site server (that I
detest) or Firefox, but they will not allow sendmail even with smarthost.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered L
block them.
A large percentage of spam originates from the USA. It would be just
as rational to block mail from all IP addresses that are listed as
being there. (-;
Maybe France is blocking all of USA, or all of Verizon.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/
On 6/11/2010 12:39 AM, Werner Koch wrote:
Hi!
One of the subscribers to this list created a mail forward to an
automated ticketing system which responds to the the poster. The
owner of the ticketing system at secure.mpcustomer.com does not
respond to any of our queries to send us more informati
and not contain the private data.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
t one from the
list, and it is usually too much trouble to send another reply to the
list. I wish all lists were set up so a reply to a message from the list
went back to the list, but there is no point asking that from a list
that does things another way.
--
.~. Jean-David
> On Thursday 10 June 2010 16:00:18 David Shaw wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Periodically there is a discussion on this list about whether having your
>> key on a keyserver will result in more spam. My feeling on this is that
>> you might get more spam, but it&#
Lee"
>
>
> We found your contact Email address from wwwkeys.ch.pgp.net:11371
> My name is Stephen and I come from China, Hong Kong.
>
(spam contents snipped - it goes on to offer to sell me LCD screens for my
"retail store, shop, boutique or any public area")
D
http://www.jabberwocky.com/domain-auction.html
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
ey
> is 1024 with the three of them taking up 3072 total.
That is not correct. Each individual key can be up to 3072 bytes. The
internal hardware can actually handle slightly more, but 3072 is the current
limit.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing l
, or let me know and I'll ping them. I'm sending this
to gnupg-users and sks-devel to start with.
Bid early and often - it's for a good cause!
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Once the FSF or FSFE confirms to me the donation has
arrived, the auction winner and I can do the usual domain name transfer process.
Any questions or comments? I'd like to start the auction on Monday (May 24th).
Feel free to forward this note to anyone wh
. In the current behavior of encrypting to the most recent
subkey, the attacker only has a 50% chance of getting your communications. You
should hope that the older PC is the one that gets compromised :)
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-use
ts. You need a
recent version of GPG (1.4.4 for the 1.x branch), and until the latest release,
you had to provide --enable-dsa2 as well.
> And, do old gpg versions verify such signatures correctly?
Only 1.4.4 and later for the 1.x branch. I d
f a value
called "q", used when generating the key. Usually, this is loosely tied to the
hash and also the key size, but it doesn't have to be.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
rStsbT0tFNzVbg3KKIQ7bHUD5
> k++hjk0K332ZXnR4X9jZku7FPpgAtp44/k0Op+yGZqW6RW6zu5s5fFPnkijef6U=
> =eaxc
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
> is obviously not an SHA1 signature.
I think there is a misunderstanding. This is absolutely a SHA1 signature. Why
do you think it isn't?
David
eresting. I'm curious how this differs from the SIM-sized card
in a SIM-sized USB reader? For example, the regular 2.0 OpenPGP card in a
SCR3320 USB stick reader
(http://www.scmmicro.com/security/view_product_en.php?PID=6).
David
___
Gnupg-u
the line, next to --encrypt. Also,
what program did you use to create that new RSA/RSA 2048-bit key?
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
;
That looks fine. It's possible there is corruption elsewhere in the file so
that there is something that looks like a (mangled) marker packet, but this one
is valid.
I'd check into how the client is sending you the files. If they're using FTP,
make sure they are sending in binary or image mode and not ascii or text mode.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
it looks like that's the beginning of the next
packet, rather than part of the marker packet. C1 would be the encrypted
session key packet, which makes sense at that point in the document.
Can you tell me a few bytes from *before* the P, G, P? Perhaps the length is
wrong.
Dav
lable public
> keys.
>
> Is it correct?
No. DRM is a collective term for the various means of controlling use of media
in one way or another. It's possible to use asymmetric crypto as part of a DRM
scheme, but this is not a requireme
nly primary keys are counted when importing keys,
even though there may be multiple subkeys attached.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
quot;revsig" to issue a revocation for that signature.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
ugh a password guesser for a few days or weeks.
I do not think that this is a break of any serious crypto, though. If someone
could arrange for AES or any other strong cipher to be broken simply by asking
for it on a web site, this would be news.
David
_
s, but the
choice is yours.
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
ed on the error, it looks like your secret keyring is corrupt. Do you have
a backup of it?
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
601 - 700 of 2232 matches
Mail list logo
