On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 11:41:53AM +0100, Krzysztof Żelechowski wrote:
>
> Dnia 12-02-2008, Wt o godzinie 11:59 +0100, Anders Breindahl pisze:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On 200802010958, Krzysztof Żelechowski wrote:
> > > 1. The decrypted information must not make it to any persistent medium
> >
> > Us
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 03:28:49PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am not a encryption expert, and need some help from the GnuPG user group.
That's why we are here.
> We have a new software product that has the capability of encrypting
> documents using SMIME. How common is SMIME and used o
On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 04:23:06PM -0500, John W. Moore III wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> - Original Message
> Subject: Re: How true can this be?
> From: Janusz A. Urbanowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Raygene <
On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 01:15:23PM -0800, Raygene wrote:
>
> While discussing GnuPG on MacNN forum, someone posted the following message:
>
> Tonight I met this guy who works for an internet security company. they help
> governments/law agencies, what he told me is so depressing. apparently, big
On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 01:48:02PM +0700, Brian Smith wrote:
> Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > Nice idea. When trying to find decent backup methods for my
> > new Tor identity key I cam accross this thread.
> >
> > I played all day with ocr and friends. In the course I wrote
> > a small script that
On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 12:40:02PM +0300, Oskar L. wrote:
> Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> > In the battle between armor and warhead, _always_ bet on the warhead.
> >
> > Playing defensively and trying to make an email address invisible is
> > going to be an exercise in frustration. They always get see
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 03:34:50PM -0500, John Clizbe wrote:
> > Alex wrote:
> >> Yes, common sense. if you submit your key to a keyserver, there
> >> should be some way to distinguish your key from hundreds of
> >> other having the same short name, when searching for a key.
> >
> > Sorry, I for
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 01:06:18PM +0300, Oskar L. wrote:
> I'm about to generate a new keypair, and got a few questions.
>
> I have many e-mail addresses and change them frequently, and therefore I
> don't want to have one in my public key. (Also because I'm afraid of
> getting spam.) I think thi
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 10:51:15AM +0200, Werner Koch wrote:
> In this regard Thunderbird is no better than Outlook!
At least Thunderbird openly invites plugins and Enigmail is a good one.
A.
--
JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP: 0x46399138
od zwracania uwagi na detale są lekarze, adwokaci, programiśc
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 01:02:58PM -0500, Andrew Berg wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> Atom Smasher wrote:
> > gpg does support RSA-2048/SHA-256 (or even RSA-4096/SHA-512) which
> > is what i've been using for a while now. i'll sign this email with
> > RSA-2048/
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 08:08:02PM +0800, Jim Berland wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I am going to try to set up GPG for our small company (about 15
> people) and would like to ask you guys for some help. Following I will
> write down my thoughts on this, that I had so far. Comments would be
> high
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 04:27:55PM +0800, Jim Berland wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I'm trying to find the best solution for using GPG on a USB drive
> while travelling.
>
> I read the FAQ about subkeys which suggests to only use subkeys on
> insecure computers. As far as I understand this, thoug
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 09:03:02PM +0200, Piotr Firlej wrote:
> On 5/5/07, Philipp Gühring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Hi,
> Hi, thanks for reply,
>
> >Here you have a list of random number generators that are available on the
> >market:
> >http://www.cacert.at/cgi-bin/rngresults
>
> Nice list,
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 01:57:46PM +0200, Anders Breindahl wrote:
> Saying that ``there is no such thing'' seems harsh and as if you ignore
> reality. The European Union put its hopes up for implementing a
> ``quantum cryptography'' network of communications. That sort of makes
> the term real in
On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 09:23:00AM +0100, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>
> > If the system was designed for the real world, the encrypted message
> > would, by default, consist of a binary data set, indistingushable from a
> > random stream, until and unl
On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 10:54:17AM -0800, NikNot wrote:
> On 2/19/07, Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Is there any reason to physically secure your *public* keyring in
> >... (Well, I suppose you might want to hide your secret identity!)
>
> Unfortunately, the whole GPG, with WebOfTrust c
On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 09:21:56AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have been using gpg to encrypt/decrypt files on my computer "for my
> eyes only". I have been using my public/private keypair on my keyring
> to do so. I just discovered that I can use encrypt/decrypt local
> files using a sy
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 12:53:38PM -0700, jason heddings wrote:
> Thanks for the reply (and keeping me from making a big mistake)...
>
> So, for doing basic data encryption / transmission, what's the right way to
> go? We just need to do public key encryption, send the data (via email or
> postal
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 02:13:42PM -0700, jason heddings wrote:
> I'm making use of libgcrypt for a specific encryption application. I'm
> assuming that the following is secure:
>
> - Use libgcrypt to create a keypair
> - Save the S-exp to an internal, protected keystore
> - Base64 encode the pu
On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 05:32:30PM +0100, B??r Kessels wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Op donderdag 8 februari 2007 15:36, schreef Joseph Oreste Bruni:
> > You might want to check out "Domain Keys" which is used to
> > authenticate email sessions between MTA's.
> >
> > Also, peer-to-peer authentication can
On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 02:17:50AM +0100, Johan Wevers wrote:
> Janusz A. Urbanowicz wrote:
>
> >Do you mean that if I did get some VC funding for design of open
> >crypto smartcard targeted for OpenPGP use and then published it (as a
> >part of the business plan) I w
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 05:49:00PM +0100, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 13:06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>
> > Is it very hard to design such a card from scratch, and very expensive
> > to have it produced as custom hardware? I'm sure there are enough
> > chip-producing companies in China
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 09:18:13AM -0500, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> Ismael Valladolid Torres wrote:
> > A smartcard is very convenient as far as it's a multi application
> > device, so you can store much other info apart from GnuPG keys,
> > i.e. Mozilla passwords or such.
>
> ... I'm sorry, I'm s
On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 03:09:43PM -0500, Brian Rosenvinge wrote:
> We have decided to decrypt using a "special" user and re-encrypt the
> file to multiple users. Our concern is that unless we want to do this
> manually it has to be scripted and that will require the "special"
> user's passphra
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 10:59:52AM -0600, Benny Helms wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 12:25 +0200, Janusz A. Urbanowicz wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 01:38:23PM -0600, Benny Helms wrote:
>
> > What is your actual threat model here?
> >
> > The simplest answer
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 01:38:23PM -0600, Benny Helms wrote:
> Hi folks.
>
> I've read the man page. I've read the FAQ's. I'm not seeing what I'm
> looking for.
>
> Using something like "zip", you can use a -T to test the integrity of
> the file. Note: this is not testing that nobody has alter
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 07:48:25PM +0300, Oskar L. wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'd like to export all public keys in my keyring to seperate ASCII-armored
> files, using the name from the user ID as the filname, and adding ".asc"
> as the extension. If a key has multiple user IDs, then the name from the
>
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 11:41:01PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have seen in the spec rfc3156 that a message should be signed and
> then encrypted, but hypothetically if send a message to someone I do
> not like and sign it and then encrypt it he/she can forward it to
> someone else pretendi
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 11:33:14AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Todd Zullinger tmz at pobox.com wrote on
> Thu Jun 1 11:46:48 CEST 2006 :
>
> > While I prefer gnupg to pgp myself, I did just happen to see a
> > reference to pgp command line today
>
> the cost is *astronomical*
>
> have play
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 01:59:37PM +0100, David Gray wrote:
> Will suggest to the customer that we use signed & encrypted
> transmissions. The only Issue we then have is that they wish to be
> custodians of the private key,
There is no need for them, from the cryptography point of view. Using
p
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 09:56:16PM +0200, Johan Wevers wrote:
> David Shaw wrote:
>
> >There should be no special steps to take. Aside from the obvious
> >steps of making a backup and testing that your environment still does
> >what you want it to do, you can just install 1.4.3 on top of 1.2.1.
>
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 09:09:03AM +0100, David Gray wrote:
> Hi David,
> Thanks for the info, even if it's not what I wanted to hear. :-)
>
> What do you mean by "raw Rijndael"?
raw binary algorithm data not enveloped with any metadata (file format)
From the code it is either raw binary
On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 02:09:36PM -0500, John W. Moore III wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Remco Post wrote:
>
> > since the xscale cpu found in most wm 5.0 devices is in no way
> > compatible with an ia32 (eg pentium) cpu, this is nonsense. There is
> > some effor
On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 05:43:03PM -0800, D_C wrote:
> hello group -
>
> apologies for the newbie questions.
>
> i am wondering if there are any webmail services that can decrypt
> email, if i somehow inform of my PGP key?
>
> also, i am travelling without knowing my pgp key. is this somehow
> c
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:06:17AM -0500, Henry Hertz Hobbit wrote:
> Benjamin Esham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >On Feb 22, 2006, at 6:22 AM, Janusz A. Urbanowicz wrote:
> >
> >> And there is really no point in ecryptiong the whole access since the
> >&g
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 10:38:19AM -0500, Benjamin Esham wrote:
> On Feb 22, 2006, at 6:22 AM, Janusz A. Urbanowicz wrote:
>
> >And there is really no point in ecryptiong the whole access since the
> >contents, the emails usually travel the rest of the net unencrypted.
> Bu
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 07:52:26AM -0500, Henry Hertz Hobbit wrote:
> Johan Wevers wrote:
>
> >Henry Hertz Hobbit wrote:
> >
> >>Usually, if you are using a web interface to access your email, only the
> >>initial authentication is done via SSL. After that if your URL address
> >>shifts to using
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 06:07:56AM +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I need to sign files remotely. They're moderately large, so transmitting
> them back to my firewalled-off laptop (I'm usually behind a slow line),
> where the secret key lives, isn't a good idea.
create (and rotate fre
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 10:34:38PM +0100, Jim Berland wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I understand the use of GPG end-to-end-encryption and use it with a
> few of my contacts. What I want to make sure is the following.
>
> I am going to move to China for some time. My email ISP is located
> outsid
On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 12:13:45AM -0500, Atom Smasher wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, enediel gonzalez wrote:
>
> > ===
>
> why are you using php for a cron job?
many people deploy PHP cron scripts because thats the only language
they know (which is probably the case)
on one of such o
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 02:07:17PM -0500, Atom Smasher wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2006, Janusz A. Urbanowicz wrote:
>
> >from my experience, all keys for long-term, _safe storage_ (and after
> >revocation) should be kept with no passphases at all
> >
> >human memory
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 12:21:00AM -0500, Atom Smasher wrote:
> has anyone given any thought to what would be the difference between
> carefully and carelessly making hard-copy backups of secret keys?
>
> i mean, it would be stupid to print a copy of ones secret key (with a weak
> passphrase) an
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 08:33:07AM -0700, Kurt Fitzner wrote:
> I am contemplating a change to my GnuPG Explorer Extension, but I need
> some background information.
>
> I know that encrypting a file without signing it is commonly done with
> symmetrical encryption. My question is, do people com
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 11:32:21AM +0930, Roscoe wrote:
> I imagine it's because stable is frozen. Hence only fixes will get in
> - and not new vewsions.
> (I maybe wrong on that.)
> (Naturally that only applies to stable..)
>
> Building and installing your own gnupg.deb from gnupg.org sources ha
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:02:56PM +0930, Alphax wrote:
> > Not true. The OpenPGP card specification is a card application and
> > you may put as many other applications on a card as you like and the
> > EEPROM allows to. With 6k (and even less possible) it is actually a
> > pretty small applica
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 01:02:52AM +0930, Alphax wrote:
> Is it possible to arbitrarily make an OpenPGP key with whatever keypair?
There is no software that would do this right now, but assuming this is a
actual RSA keypair, yes. Why not?
Alex
--
mors ab alto
0x46399138
___
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 11:48:45PM +0930, Alphax wrote:
> > The application is free to do whatever it wants with these objects,
> > given sufficient authentication to the card (PIN). Technically, there is
> > nothing CA can do to prevent you to use your X.509 keys as OpenPGP keys.
>
> I think I mi
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 12:33:07PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 04:15:47PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > After adding some keys recently, I always get:
> [snip]
> > gpg: mpi larger than indicated length (2 bytes)
> > gpg: keyring_get_keyblock: read error: i
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 07:16:59PM +0200, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 16:54:39 +0200, Janusz A Urbanowicz said:
>
> > The aim of the secure viewer then was to make difficult to obtain eyes-only
> > message text as a file or a pipe. It checked if output is a live tt
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 04:36:53PM +0200, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:55:02 +0200, Janusz A Urbanowicz said:
>
> > Some form of secure viewer was present in PGP 2.3 and 2.6 which were FLOSS.
>
> Huh, that's new to me. Both versions are pure command
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 04:58:52AM -0400, Charly Avital wrote:
> > However, GnuPG can call other programs to do other tasks (keyserver
> > access programs, JPEG viewers for photo IDs), so it's not impossible
> > that GnuPG could call an external secure viewer program. I don't know
> > of one offh
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 03:02:11PM -0500, Matthew Wilson wrote:
> My office uses PGP to create self-extracting executable files.
[]
> Is this feature possible with GPG? I'm trying to automate lots of
> processes and the less highlighting and right-clicking I have to do in
> Windows Explorer, the b
How is signature level specification done in 1.4+?
Alex
--
mors ab alto
0x46399138
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
53 matches
Mail list logo
