-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Hi
On Friday 27 June 2014 at 11:35:00 PM, in <mid:a2f8dba9-1da7-47a6-bc79-cfaea3b02...@jabberwocky.com>, David Shaw wrote: > Incidentally, since subkeys have come up in this > thread, I seem to recall a few strange bugs with 8.x > (8.0? 8.1?) that make it difficult to use if the key > you are encrypting to has a signing subkey. 8.x didn't > always handle signing subkeys properly, so could end up > failing to encrypt (it wasn't 100% of the time - it > depended on which subkey was dated first). If anyone > is curious, I'll dig out my notes for this. I > submitted the bug to PGP, and I know it was fixed in a > later version. My recollection is that PGP 8.x would always try to encrypt to the newest subkey, and encryption would fail if the newest was a signing subkey. I had 8.0.3 and 8.1; if memory serves, both had this issue - signing subkeys were fairly new at the time. - -- Best regards MFPA mailto:2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-gro...@riseup.net Never lean forward to push an invisible object. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iPQEAQEKAF4FAlOuiQVXFIAAAAAALgAgaXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3Bl bnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEJBMjM5QjQ2ODFGMUVGOTUxOEU2QkQ0NjQ0 N0VDQTAzAAoJEKipC46tDG5pkWMD/Rcv4i/MDuEQ5gujWhAjiKQimX9K0gZ8XaqZ 0zHcyHUDdUGkKHhaV9c4C3vkTkPKpZpTLhv6n5ADTHf4f1ggaZiwo48sI3aJ34O+ egbYC0AIyl8sw+aj/o54/bH6z+tsYH9pEH9dSl8Z/9NPi/vsjQpf/nK4bT+PAVnW KbUR8+Vr =Vmtp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
