Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-07 Thread Faramir
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 John Clizbe escribió: > And depending on the printer font, you get the joy of '0' vs 'O'; '1' vs 'l'; > and '8' vs 'B'. But I suppose you can copy/paste it into a text editor, and chose a font clearer to read... or I am wrong? > I'll take 0-9A-

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-07 Thread Faramir
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 John Clizbe escribió: > Faramir wrote: >> John Clizbe escribió: >> >>> And depending on the printer font, you get the joy of '0' vs 'O'; '1' vs >>> 'l'; >>> and '8' vs 'B'. >> But I suppose you can copy/paste it into a text editor, and chose a >>

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-07 Thread John Clizbe
Faramir wrote: > John Clizbe escribió: > >> And depending on the printer font, you get the joy of '0' vs 'O'; '1' vs 'l'; >> and '8' vs 'B'. > > But I suppose you can copy/paste it into a text editor, and chose a > font clearer to read... or I am wrong? Could you explain how you are going to c

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-06 Thread John Clizbe
David Shaw wrote: > But you seem to be missing the point. Uuencode (or GPG armor) creates > lines that are very difficult to type in. There are no spaces, and > the character set includes uppercase, lowercase, numbers, and > symbols. There is no CRC to help you type it back in again, so if

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-06 Thread David Shaw
On Oct 6, 2008, at 3:25 PM, Morton D. Trace wrote: David Shaw wrote: On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 08:03:12AM +0200, Sven Radde wrote: Am Sonntag, den 05.10.2008, 19:49 -0400 schrieb David Shaw: A revocation certificate, on the other hand, doesn't have all that much that can be removed. Luckily re

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-06 Thread Morton D. Trace
David Shaw wrote: > On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 08:03:12AM +0200, Sven Radde wrote: >> Am Sonntag, den 05.10.2008, 19:49 -0400 schrieb David Shaw: >>> A revocation certificate, on the other hand, doesn't >>> have all that much that can be removed. Luckily revocation >>> certificates are pretty sho

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-06 Thread David Shaw
On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 08:03:12AM +0200, Sven Radde wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 05.10.2008, 19:49 -0400 schrieb David Shaw: > > A revocation certificate, on the other hand, doesn't > > have all that much that can be removed. Luckily revocation > > certificates are pretty short to begin with. Th

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-05 Thread Sven Radde
Hi! Am Sonntag, den 05.10.2008, 20:11 -0400 schrieb Faramir: > Also, if the key is reconstructed (and provided the passphrase can be > found somewhere), it should be easy to revoke it... Actively revoking a key requires the passphrase and it requires a trustworthy PC. When I'm currently trying

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-05 Thread Sven Radde
Am Sonntag, den 05.10.2008, 19:49 -0400 schrieb David Shaw: > A revocation certificate, on the other hand, doesn't > have all that much that can be removed. Luckily revocation > certificates are pretty short to begin with. The only real advantage > that paperkey could bring to revocation ce

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-05 Thread David Shaw
On Oct 5, 2008, at 8:11 PM, Faramir wrote: * The file format is now included as part of the base16 output, as there is no guarantee that this program will be on-hand when a reconstruction is necessary. The format can also be displayed via the --file-format command. Suggested

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-05 Thread Faramir
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 David Shaw escribió: ... > that much that can be removed. Luckily revocation certificates are > pretty short to begin with. The only real advantage that paperkey could > bring to revocation certificates is the per-line CRC, which makes > retyping e

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-05 Thread David Shaw
On Oct 5, 2008, at 3:40 PM, Sven Radde wrote: Although David's awesome little tool [1] reduces the chance of losing a secret key, I am still a fan for pre-generated revocation certificates in case a key is irrecoverably lost. David, is there a chance that you will extend paperkey so that it e

Re: Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-05 Thread Robert J. Hansen
On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 21:40 +0200, Sven Radde wrote: > David, is there a chance that you will extend paperkey so that it > encodes and decodes revocation certificates? I'm not David (obviously), but I don't see the win here. The problem with paper copies of private keys is they're big. If there'

Paperkey for Revocation Certificates? (Feature-Request :-)

2008-10-05 Thread Sven Radde
Hi! Although David's awesome little tool [1] reduces the chance of losing a secret key, I am still a fan for pre-generated revocation certificates in case a key is irrecoverably lost. David, is there a chance that you will extend paperkey so that it encodes and decodes revocation certificates? Ad