Re: [Enigmail] Popescu and keys

2015-05-22 Thread Ben McGinnes
On 22/05/2015 5:00 pm, Werner Koch wrote: > On Thu, 21 May 2015 23:58, b...@adversary.org said: > >> Is it possible that a keyserver running the old, buggy PKS code >> (v. 0.9.something) mangled these keys? > > Yes, but that won't explain why the key binding signature is valid. Okay, there's cle

Re: [Enigmail] Popescu and keys

2015-05-22 Thread Werner Koch
On Thu, 21 May 2015 23:58, b...@adversary.org said: > Is it possible that a keyserver running the old, buggy PKS code > (v. 0.9.something) mangled these keys? Yes, but that won't explain why the key binding signature is valid. Shalom-Salam, Werner -- Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen reg

Lower Bound for Primes during GnuPG key generation (was Re: [Enigmail] Popescu and keys)

2015-05-21 Thread vedaal
On 5/21/2015 at 3:45 PM, "Werner Koch" wrote: >Some guy >downloaded most RSA keys from a keyserver and tried to factor 1.9 >million moduli. They found 30 keys with a subkey having one of the >first 1000 primes as a factor. > I looked at 8 of those keys and > found that 2 are likely PGP create

Re: [Enigmail] Popescu and keys

2015-05-21 Thread Ben McGinnes
On 22/05/2015 5:37 am, Werner Koch wrote: > > These are all encryption subkeys. The third key is the one from > H. Peter Anvin. I have not found one of the fingerprints given in the > said blog posting: gpg removed it while importing the key. It is a bit > disturbing that the other subkey liste

Re: [Enigmail] Popescu and keys

2015-05-21 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On Thu 2015-05-21 12:23:20 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > Which key does he claim to have broken? If Mircea has broken your > encryption-capable subkey (0xB8A6B74C001892C2) then he might only be > able to decrypt messages sent to you, but not sign them. > > To provide him with an opportunity

Re: [Enigmail] Popescu and keys

2015-05-21 Thread Werner Koch
On Thu, 21 May 2015 18:23, d...@fifthhorseman.net said: > At least one of the keys he claimed to have broken is a degraded copy of > one of H. Peter Anvin's actual subkeys, as Hanno Böck pointed out here: That reminds if of a private discussion I had last autumn. Some guy downloaded most RSA key

Re: [Enigmail] Popescu and keys

2015-05-21 Thread Robert J. Hansen
> Which key does he claim to have broken? If Mircea has broken your > encryption-capable subkey (0xB8A6B74C001892C2) then he might only be > able to decrypt messages sent to you, but not sign them. He didn't say. You're correct in that I made an unfounded assumption; thank you for the correcti

Re: [Enigmail] Popescu and keys

2015-05-21 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On Wed 2015-05-20 20:13:32 -0400, Robert J. Hansen wrote: > In the last couple of days a few different people have pointed me to > Mircea Popescu's blog, where he's claimed he's broken ~150 keys that are > in common circulation among the keyservers. At least one of the keys he claimed to have brok