-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:31 AM, Raimar Sandner <m...@404not-
found.de> wrote:
> After all the _old_ key could have been compromised, that is
what I meant :)
Thank you for the information. I will clearsign this using the
new key only.
EE79C636 has already been updated [and uploaded] with an
expiration date. This key is outdated due to the SHA-1 break in
collisions.
pub 1024D/EE79C636 2009-04-24 [expires: 2009-08-19]
Key fingerprint = 0DC0 D8F6 A3A7 C107 59C4 1512 579A F712
EE79 C636
uid Allen Schultz <allen.schu...@gmail.com>
uid [jpeg image of size 6128]
sub 2048g/762B1E36 2009-04-24
As far as signing or verifying through email. The subject has
already been discussed. Again, it's your choice. I may sign at a
"unverified - fingerprint through unsecure medium" per the
questions gpg asks. It does not validate the rest of my public
ring. But that was only done with the older EE79C636 as of the
signing of this email.
Let me know if this signature does not work either.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.72
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJKFYWWAAoJEMNyjCz1VlHgo3YH/05JARgW8utXay9rR7nIe7lI
b1aRHYxTVslXKEKOiGk4PqAWkVCPbdly2dOzta/q1r+yq1HOXDe9v8mfMFstJdMd
MTDhZd7QF9Cc2o586Nz1zHbGqkNvBb4U3oO+4AkgjmZMzL3IMXeYvUCvWbKHm7uh
Bd0ofmYC/ABFCKR0jSrn/Zfs3Qf0fAXomPuuPSSpTghVZyeTyAvwtnda5tqvmjmh
2DK2SGJ0c6yC8GbHFzS2np8plL957FpnEHfrTkxfuOw6GVNixOvrcAlyepkX2rW+
Vi3KfSrVIp2KOxTy6pOSkXLnweFY5C9fKsgEpS2hnUpy43L0YeChu7bQDRWHKlA=
=wFD0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Allen Schultz <allen.schu...@gmail.com>
pub 3072R/DAD4736B 2009-05-20
Key fingerprint = 16AD EFE1 D68F C8A8 B086 68CD 1A35 85C7 DAD4 736B
uid Allen Schultz (aldaek) <allen.schu...@gmail.com>
uid [jpeg image of size 6128]
sub 2048R/F55651E0 2009-05-20 [expires: 2010-05-20]
sub 2048R/5687B83E 2009-05-20 [expires: 2010-05-20]
_______________________________________________
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
