I've tried to verify signature of the email that arrived from gnupg mailing list (sent by Ryan).
Verification fails, with the following error message. I'm using GPG-v.1.4.7, and Thunderbird/Enigmail. Could somebody with a clue explain me what's wrong, and whether it's a problem with my config (and if so - what I should look at), or whether it's a bug in GPG? gpg command line and output:,C:\\Program Files\\GNU\\GnuPG\\gpg.exe --charset utf8 --batch --no-tty --status-fd 2 -d,gpg: invalid radix64 character 3A skipped,gpg: invalid radix64 character 2E skipped,gpg: invalid radix64 character 2E skipped,gpg: invalid radix64 character 28 skipped,gpg: invalid radix64 character 29 skipped,gpg: CRC error; B76AE6 - 431CA8,gpg: [don't know]: invalid packet (ctb=55) Thank you! -- Regards, Uri Blumenthal <Disclaimer> -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert J. Hansen Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 10:14 AM To: Ryan Malayter Cc: gnupg-users@gnupg.org Subject: Re: Quantum computing -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 > Note that breaking Diffie-Hellman and other discrete logarithm based > algorithms is thought to be nearly equivalent to factoring, but has > not been proven to be so. Going off the top of my head, the DLP is known to be greater than or equal to the difficulty of the IFP. You can make strong arguments that they're equal difficulty in a computational-theoretic sense, and you can make strong arguments that in real silicon DLP will be stronger due to our current lack of understanding of how to efficiently use the general number field sieve for the DLP. The current state of the art in the GNFS requires a large amount of storage overhead for the DLP, while the storage overhead for the IFP is comparatively minimal. As a word of warning, comparing DLP to IFP is a spectacularly black art. There are so many nuances to it that just expressing some of the ideas in English is difficult. As further warning: it's 9:10am, I haven't yet had my morning cup of coffee, and I'm working without my references. This being the internet, there's also a nonzero chance that I'm barking mad. Confirm this information before relying on it. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJGJierAAoJELcA9IL+r4EJSgoH/jz2SyN/4ZfAsnoJossJn6cp /b/CND53iaqPnIv6vKcjDNfseBYdp2ZRHTZPw1ZVhd9+zdUwKr8IfVmFh8+XA/Ra ayEnbf/OzfVw+VK9nSJfvroHBZnW/UQYFkwFsCpwYpXLDSab1JjNPV1Ys67lqx3e gnM2w0fjDoXwE0hI+InCceL+bptOIpZL+xQN3AgYRovsUGG5rwngjOPk31+5SCFV iMe1msmNhOV8KWcIkOFHeRZQxHKMtDVoZfSnv7BLYh4Ufh/moNDpIF9RI1/JuwJI 5eSXPEAzNAOXSxqyyrd5YC9ykMxMss69/BD7I6yfBQxHCcskUBjDsynxjLg+2NQ= =Qxyo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users *********************************************************************** Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation, offer or agreement or any information about any transaction, customer account or account activity contained in this communication. *********************************************************************** _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
