On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 14:23:44 +0200
Peter Lebbing wrote:
> Now let's get on to a passphrase manager and GnuPG specifically. A
> different way to look at it is this: would you use GnuPG to protect
> your passphrase manager? This is actually a feature request I've seen
> multiple times: please provi
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 11:46:33 +0200
Peter Lebbing wrote:
[...]
> shared the passphrase. If you can't remember which is 1 and which is
> 2, use something you can recognise. For instance, if the pinentry
> asks you "Please unlock key 0x6228A8BC", you could append a C, the
> very last digit of the id
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 12:27:30 +0100
MFPA <2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-gro...@riseup.net> wrote:
>
> The single point of failure stops being a passphrase used across
> multiple keys; it becomes the password required to open the password
> manager that protects the multiple passphrases.
I already use a p
On 27/07/17 13:27, MFPA wrote:
> I guess I should have trimmed my quote less severely. Using a password
> manager would enable somebody who says they cannot remember multiple
> decent-quality unique passwords to not share passwords between
> different keys.
Ah yes :-). I agree.
> The single point
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Thursday 27 July 2017 at 10:46:33 AM, in
, Peter
Lebbing wrote:-
> On 27/07/17 11:24, MFPA wrote:
>> Have you considered using a password manager to
>> remember them?
> What would be the purpose?
I guess I should have trimmed my quote less s
On 27/07/17 11:24, MFPA wrote:
> Have you considered using a password manager to remember them?
What would be the purpose?
I already fail to see the problem of GnuPG filling in a passphrase it
already knows... surely an attacker would try the same thing as well, I
don't know what GnuPG not trying
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wednesday 26 July 2017 at 8:08:28 PM, in
, Mario Figueiredo wrote:-
> The sharing of passwords between different keys
> becomes inevitable
> after a certain threshold. And I suspect for
> everyone, not just old
> people.
Have you considered
On 07/26/2017 09:08 PM, Mario Figueiredo wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2017 08:52:12 +0200
> Werner Koch wrote:
>
>> There is a kludge in gpg and gpg-agent described in this comment:
>> [...]
>
> Hello Werner,
>
> Thank you for the information and debug method. And hopefully this
> problem will be fi
On Wed, 26 Jul 2017 08:52:12 +0200
Werner Koch wrote:
> There is a kludge in gpg and gpg-agent described in this comment:
> [...]
Hello Werner,
Thank you for the information and debug method. And hopefully this
problem will be fixed sometime in the near future. My brain is old
and tired and it
On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 22:30, mar...@gmx.com said:
> I've been trying to understand gpg-agent cache behavior in the presence
> of two distinct keys with the same passphrase. Namely, why is that it
> only asks for the passphrase once, regardless of the key being used?
There is a kludge in gpg and gpg
Hello everyone,
I've been trying to understand gpg-agent cache behavior in the presence
of two distinct keys with the same passphrase. Namely, why is that it
only asks for the passphrase once, regardless of the key being used?
So I've read the Assuan protocol documentation at (1), in particular
t
11 matches
Mail list logo
