David Yes the key is generated by hushmail.com. Not sure if they will listen to me, but I will forward this to the list where the problem originated
Thanks for the help and sorry for top posting, on my BlackBerry (and sadly no gnupg) Sean On 1/29/10, David Shaw <ds...@jabberwocky.com> wrote: > On Jan 17, 2010, at 12:23 PM, Sean Rima wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Hi >> >> A friend on the pgpnet mailing list is using a hushmail.com gpg key but >> when I import it, I get: >> >> C:\Users\Sean Rima>gpg --import < test.txt >> gpg: key C4E23A82: accepted non self-signed user ID >> ""******...@hushmail.com" <-...@hushmail.com>" >> gpg: key C4E23A82: public key ""-...@hushmail.com" >> <jefal...@hushmail.com>" >> imported >> gpg: Total number processed: 1 >> gpg: imported: 1 (RSA: 1) >> >> >> If I edit the key, I see: >> >> pub 0s/C4E23A82 created: 2010-01-07 expires: never usage: SC >> [ unknown] (1). "---...@hushmail.com" <---...@hushmail.com> >> >> >> I see there is no encrytion subkey. >> >> If I look at the key with --list-packets, I see >> >> C:\Users\Sean Rima>gpg --list-packets < test.txt >> :public key packet: >> version 4, algo 3, created 1262830845, expires 0 >> unknown algorithm 3 > > Algorithm 3 is "RSA Sign-Only". > >> :public sub key packet: >> version 4, algo 2, created 1262830846, expires 0 >> unknown algorithm 2 > > Algorithm 2 is "RSA Encrypt-Only". > >> :signature packet: algo 3, keyid 7853D9CDC4E23A82 >> version 4, created 1262830857, md5len 0, sigclass 0x18 >> digest algo 2, begin of digest 8b f2 >> hashed subpkt 2 len 4 (sig created 2010-01-07) >> subpkt 16 len 8 (issuer key ID 7853D9CDC4E23A82) >> unknown algorithm 3 >> > > Both of those algorithms are deprecated in the OpenPGP spec: "RSA > Encrypt-Only (2) and RSA Sign-Only are deprecated and SHOULD NOT be > generated, but may be interpreted." > >> I am using gpg2.0.12 (waiting for gpg4win to be compiled to latest) > > The 1.4.x branch will interpret these deprecated keys (internally treating > them as regular RSA with the appropriate encrypt or sign flags). I don't > think gpg2 does that. > > Was this generated by Hushmail? If so, they to stop generating keys that > the spec says SHOULD NOT be generated :) > > David > > -- Sent from my mobile device _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
