Re: OpenPGP card: What RSA problems? Why not for key signing?
On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 18:22:35 +0200, Felix E Klee said: > * What are those problems that one may encounter with RSA? You can't load a non-1024 bit RSA key to the card. RSA keys are optional in OpenPGP and thus some implementaions may not be abale to use your key. > * Why should the key on the card not be used for key signing? Either becuase people feel that 1024 bit RSA/SHA-1 is not strong enough or due to the diculties of creating a backup of that key. Without a backup and a borken card you won't be able to properly use your key anymore and all collected signatures are practically lost. > * Is there any advantage in using a DSA master key (not supported by the > OpenPGP card, I know) instead of an RSA master key? DSA signatures are much smaller. > * What's the best tool for generating the 1024 bit RSA key? Should I > simply use plain "gpg --gen-key --no-random-seed-file" or should the > key be generated on card, or does it not really matter? gpg --gen-key --no-random-seed-file is only useful if you don't have permission to write it. Shalom-Salam, Werner ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: OpenPGP card: What RSA problems? Why not for key signing?
At Thu, 06 Apr 2006 11:24:25 +0200, Werner Koch wrote: > > * Why should the key on the card not be used for key signing? > > Either becuase people feel that 1024 bit RSA/SHA-1 is not strong > enough Yes, one reads this and that: Some say 1024 may become easily crackable [1] in the upcoming years, some say that it won't. OK, my data may not be that interesting [2] but, still, I want to do it right, or more or less so. So, I'll probably simply create a 4096 bit RSA key with 10 years life time and store it on devices not accessible from the systems I normally use. So, I've one more question: How long should the passphrase reasonably be, in case ... ... it is a phrase containing words from a dictionary (e.g. taken from a book)? ... it is a phrase made up of easily memorizable/pronounceable but non-real words, formatted like an ordinary phrase (i.e. one word, one blank, etc.)? ... it is just a random string? The goal is to make decrypting the pass phrase protected secret key about as hard as factoring the public key. Is this even remotely possible? > Without a backup and a borken card you won't be able to properly use > your key anymore and all collected signatures are practically lost. Well, I planned to have the key stored on two smartcards (one for backup), anyway. If not used for storage of the master key, the smartcards, of course, are still nice for storing sub keys, and have them available all the time. [1] I.e. with not too expensive equipment and in a rather short time, say a couple of days. [2] I plan to use the key in the context of financial transactions, though. -- Felix E. Klee ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: 1.4.3 // proper syntax for --edit-key cross-certify ?
>Message: 6 >Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 22:02:16 -0400 >From: David Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: 1.4.3 // proper syntax for --edit-key cross-certify ? >PGP does not generate signing subkeys. You generated a RSA >encryption >key that happened to be without key flags (I guess that version of >PGP >didn't use them yet), and so it appears as a RSA sign+encrypt key >in >GnuPG. well, it is an 'atypical' pgp build ;-) but the subkey is recognized by gnupg as a 'signing' subkey, and moreover, is 'forced' by gnupg front ends to be used for signing (there is no '!' indicator available to put as an option in gpg.conf) here is an example of such a key: -BEGIN PGP PRIVATE KEY BLOCK- Comment: passphrase: rsav4t lQHqBDwg+g0BBADauhzNV+0XYAg1Q8O8m8QhyxXz2HUeqB/7+lOlFQT/UnNVvtmm 9ouqwy/7HUpsxYLep3laFCUek6tSmJQKF7agjCqN3HrzE6eFWp7kVejuiDGKj0UK OwuOUQVRtdtSZMY1Hh0MWhZDbtJYkQU81gijs9FOLva9x1jafrZuHjhdGQAFEf8D AwLsMC6ZozNWu2D5ziUHulKzmrRwWNCyCQkxVm+0z/bO9auiMlMUqk8WPuieHHQg ki+SvGekTtSJG8gEZeTkYo/+rYGs9bv9cm/5cZ3/5WQPEYc9zxggwIz9/E+4zOcV D9FPZuo0cOouE9eHRSd+xTT/c+YX6ypqa/WFicx71SYZ6FahYdsKNiK11nx7SVT+ dBF7hHcgH5vgfza2ZtA0M0y3d6/NFATNqFRVdl9D20MR+fBs/RDBHDudUFV07x7R pDPm/zai9dmLfsRsQcPKgjhC/YkNE08inkwMi7aUTKIOsKTHZuY+y2YnD0RLXakD udpmiA/2vtGR9D7NaVW24rqdtK6r/B8DW0CtGb/JqGw80JUAz8YwvNMXbLnggAvh IJTdjjf0CFhKQ8JF/aCBlmcXGaGo37URwKlgfdHnOa14DnO51Po3SIKisSGfLmpM 3soVFY0vj4vSXX2cibQYcnNhdjR0IDxyc2F2NHRAa2V5LnRlc3Q+nQO8BEQ0kkAB CADjn5GScd2SFDZ046cohclmm8nob1Nj/g2bqHfN16LQ77dLSESBuo56yxLXkS/s xVUtTOW7abZ1ksdBOF1xrq/g49bfP7i4RIrMf+CpFRO/Il1rqkjGuZSPBMRX12Ti hY1z4HU1jocPkyuccO3+VDXnrHOhzlBxzTlYH/4oIiPimyk+0n4Xg4RShcnyL8f+ uSXwb6pHWYypCOW1QxwthK9PtLs3TORLpebOXqnNwM3y5XtIcqkdbKfqmPR5OTqx NQmrEvzUThRmjRiiX/eOQww7tusr9CaIivBK3GcKkaUNxsT4RcLndQ8ZFR+skatY JDBUTC7jjxqhg0i6zwYw/sgJAAUR/gMDAi3o4bzxWYK4YGlXTPOA9lFQ8NCCLAnV BdqHIdfL8jowEowNcfhRaCKSqqF07yuTWyNfUoWuI1d1f7W8RHXgN9Ocs4cRnTeh D7KDi6ZyBPAJ+BCYpB0USAp4b/JbFc2orhUHpy+1355CBwze8aZF42N77RZ7QEJk 0Dq3ByjVdIuCb1P5SsJGWXVKJbkLAzaXDF9NJLCzcQW2jZzwFvmYrdUE3/Xo3U8C kK3JX4IugJhPaKq0sknX63rm7Y++CCRxJy1TGln08D8RMnwG/H+/lgT7cE/vZP7O GBLv6VUU2FtkNToWUm4tPFhAV03UCkmZKPsbFoEiVXwEVxgSYnoaLvHMP9w7BlFK MqyBYjPaI4JzgFvfyCrzZVH58to6Crb6Ens7kzbgums3/0rWg+2cldQyivhmoP7G 6Lx1Y1P7xtPgo7JQIsgIPaa2YsioRAoOhh338Tgu2ZJ1yvBqHhn3zxchWJZAAua0 998k6VShLO9+JAxV8J8fr6LIJiflByvqOUpjnMbYcR5VkwYcM2ebhbGiGfDS8PWy gSyFOz9QBZW1sWP6LZjOHQKPqgUl0avPG2EdcLarg3NV4ACTNsfuJtd7uksn/fGR E5rPlSvUFq/2ojNUT6tVZWpb3uLNFLikE6A2rM85NpG9UtZTYiBWbzRnb/DFjnJQ bskXNbxUWN3V9AujdTKdoJit7Rb1pPhebK6w+Pyj0HXwZ/pncx2ReVh1MmQ/L6A8 1WVS6KvXYd8qgCIKTsun25t2EtJlp7029iEHq8TaNsGqD5BsFoT/y3/J9YdmmUc1 wki+1ox6BSMhREjxZ2d9fZHJ6ALmZ2PP0ryVGlNcKV/wu/QMoIttrhkjWnVWADsc VCMkkQ8P/2MG2ukSA8qOdWLBVgTw6yLDHStkIl6Bpm+Y9Alnz6I= =oO4q -END PGP PRIVATE KEY BLOCK- -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Comment: rsa v4 key with rsa signing subkey (ckt build 9 ) mQCLBDwg+g0BBADauhzNV+0XYAg1Q8O8m8QhyxXz2HUeqB/7+lOlFQT/UnNVvtmm 9ouqwy/7HUpsxYLep3laFCUek6tSmJQKF7agjCqN3HrzE6eFWp7kVejuiDGKj0UK OwuOUQVRtdtSZMY1Hh0MWhZDbtJYkQU81gijs9FOLva9x1jafrZuHjhdGQAFEbQY cnNhdjR0IDxyc2F2NHRAa2V5LnRlc3Q+iQCpBBABAwATBQI8IPoNCQsDBwgJBAoB AgIZAQAKCRBdrtpCF+ndm7PhA/0Rm9Yhj9WS4Ti6mpxYZJ4A6tNqK8VaRwXoEdU4 6ItU202v8GW08wYvhNQ/kX+fwKPXde3PxSigNfDuhriuzU4KoR4i7KwFSovLM3V2 4m7eHme3payGIyVW8YxjYYT3f/3UxJcsW7DZ5Yo7k0+j04t+M27KATrk1R0ONG3l 3IJQRrkBCwRENJJAAQgA45+RknHdkhQ2dOOnKIXJZpvJ6G9TY/4Nm6h3zdei0O+3 S0hEgbqOessS15Ev7MVVLUzlu2m2dZLHQThdca6v4OPW3z+4uESKzH/gqRUTvyJd a6pIxrmUjwTEV9dk4oWNc+B1NY6HD5MrnHDt/lQ156xzoc5Qcc05WB/+KCIj4psp PtJ+F4OEUoXJ8i/H/rkl8G+qR1mMqQjltUMcLYSvT7S7N0zkS6Xmzl6pzcDN8uV7 SHKpHWyn6pj0eTk6sTUJqxL81E4UZo0Yol/3jkMMO7brK/QmiIrwStxnCpGlDcbE +EXC53UPGRUfrJGrWCQwVEwu448aoYNIus8GMP7ICQAFEYkAlQMFGEQ1GQtdrtpC F+ndmwEIfboEAL/q413KmmQUIVR/khZuyR+uDW1btlXODx+Rq06eDDrahCPhsKoV jbXaCw3+wIGL8wLwXgRbCxdT6T8N4ndD9rXpSca6WgCQnjJktN2hVt5xKqixJ9yh s5CnPsm7AWe66kzq07LVEea2NKHzJwhce0XjeIFOd3jD/eaeVXdzDFwb =3A9P -END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- >Bottom line is, this does not work on PGP generated keys. a request then, can cross-certify be made to work with such a key, (preferred) or, can an option of '!' be made available so that gnupg front ends recognize and sign with the primary subkey, and avoid the whole issue tia, vedaal Concerned about your privacy? Instantly send FREE secure email, no account required http://www.hushmail.com/send?l=480 Get the best prices on SSL certificates from Hushmail https://www.hushssl.com?l=485 ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: 1.4.3 // proper syntax for --edit-key cross-certify ?
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 09:51:32AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >Message: 6 > >Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 22:02:16 -0400 > >From: David Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: Re: 1.4.3 // proper syntax for --edit-key cross-certify ? > > >PGP does not generate signing subkeys. You generated a RSA > >encryption > >key that happened to be without key flags (I guess that version of > > >PGP > >didn't use them yet), and so it appears as a RSA sign+encrypt key > >in > >GnuPG. > > well, > it is an 'atypical' pgp build ;-) > > but the subkey is recognized by gnupg as a 'signing' subkey, > and moreover, is 'forced' by gnupg front ends to be used for > signing > (there is no '!' indicator available to put as an option in > gpg.conf) PGP generated keys are not any different than GPG generated keys in this regard. Go ahead and use a ! if you like. David ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
re: 1.4.3 // proper syntax for --edit-key cross-certify ?
David Shaw dshaw at jabberwocky.com wrote on Thu Apr 6 17:03:44 CEST 2006 : >PGP generated keys are not any different than GPG generated keys in >this regard. Go ahead and use a ! if you like. yes, but currently only from the command line what i was asking for, is a 'option' equivalent to '!' to put into gpg.conf so that gnupg front ends will recognize and use only the primary key for signing, and not the subkey (which is still used for encryption) i.e. !-signing-key keyid otherwise, these are the user's choices: [1] use only command line when signing (ok, not so terrible, but inconvenient/difficult for some people) [2] use only pgp for signing (what!? and lose all gnupg's features ?!? ;-) [not really an option for this group ;-) ] [3] delete/revoke the subkey and use the master for both signing and encrypting [as a v3 user, i can live with this ;-) ], but it is not the preferred way to go in terms of security, as the signing and encrypting keys really should be separate [4] make a new key in gnupg (and try to get it out to everybody who trusts only your old ones), ok, but far less convenient than [1] and [3] while the key is still trustworthy is it that difficult to put the '!' feature in the options file ? it would be much appreciated Thanks! vedaal Concerned about your privacy? Instantly send FREE secure email, no account required http://www.hushmail.com/send?l=480 Get the best prices on SSL certificates from Hushmail https://www.hushssl.com?l=485 ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: 1.4.3 // proper syntax for --edit-key cross-certify ?
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 11:57:56AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > David Shaw dshaw at jabberwocky.com wrote on > Thu Apr 6 17:03:44 CEST 2006 : > > >PGP generated keys are not any different than GPG generated keys > in > >this regard. Go ahead and use a ! if you like. > > yes, > but currently only from the command line > > what i was asking for, > is a 'option' equivalent to '!' > to put into gpg.conf so that gnupg front ends will recognize and > use only the primary key for signing, and not the subkey > (which is still used for encryption) > > i.e. > !-signing-key keyid default-key !keyid David ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
re: 1.4.3 // proper syntax for --edit-key cross-certify ?
David Shaw dshaw at jabberwocky.com wrote on Thu Apr 6 18:09:20 CEST 2006: > default-key !keyid doesn't work, ;-(( (does it need any additional input? ) here is the command line output (using cygwin): first, with the existing option of default-key 0x5AA20C866A589A97 $ gpg --clearsign c:/r/1234.txt gpg: using subkey 04ADEE20 instead of primary key 6A589A97 You need a passphrase to unlock the secret key for user: "vedaal nistar (preferred e-mail address) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" gpg: using subkey 04ADEE20 instead of primary key 6A589A97 4096-bit RSA key, ID 04ADEE20, created 2001-04-26 (main key ID 6A589A97) Enter passphrase: now with the option of default-key !0x5AA20C866A589A97 $ gpg --clearsign c:/r/1234.txt gpg: no default secret key: secret key not available gpg: c:/r/1234.txt: clearsign failed: secret key not available putting the ! in front of the keyid caused an inability to identify the key, rather than parsing the '!' as an option for the default keyid of 0x5AA20C866A589A97 what did you to to get it to work on your system? (i didn't try it with the short [8 character keyid] in gpg.conf ) vedaal Concerned about your privacy? Instantly send FREE secure email, no account required http://www.hushmail.com/send?l=480 Get the best prices on SSL certificates from Hushmail https://www.hushssl.com?l=485 ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
re: 1.4.3 // proper syntax for --edit-key cross-certify ? // success ; -)
>> default-key !keyid >doesn't work, ;-(( but what *does* work, is: default-key keyid! here is the gpg output with the option of default-key 0x5AA20C866A589A97! $ gpg --clearsign c:/r/1234.txt You need a passphrase to unlock the secret key for user: "vedaal nistar (preferred e-mail address) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" 4096-bit RSA key, ID 6A589A97, created 2001-04-26 gpg: writing to `c:/r/1234.txt.asc' gpg: RSA/SHA256 signature from: "6A589A97 vedaal nistar (preferred e-mail address) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" Thanks! (and maybe add it to the man.page) vedaal Concerned about your privacy? Instantly send FREE secure email, no account required http://www.hushmail.com/send?l=480 Get the best prices on SSL certificates from Hushmail https://www.hushssl.com?l=485 ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Date and time format
Hi. Is it possible to change date format in GPG output? When I see D:\>gpg --verify gnupg-w32cli-1.4.3.exe.sig gpg: Signature made 04/03/06 14:42:33 gpg:using RSA key 0x1CE0C630 gpg: Good signature from "Werner Koch (dist sig) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" I don't understand what date does GPG mean: — 4 March 2006? — 3 April 2006? — 6 March 2004? When you see date 04/03/06 it's hard to guess what date format is used: dd/mm/yy, mm/dd/yy, yy/mm/dd or even yy/dd/mm. By default I think it's 4 March 2006 because date format dd.mm.yy (dd.mm.) is used in my country. Also GPG displays time (14:42:33) in such way when it's hard to guess is it local or UTC. Maybe it'll be better to see something like this: D:\>gpg --verify gnupg-w32cli-1.4.3.exe.sig gpg: Signature made 4-Apr-2006 14:42:33 (local - Russian Daylight Time) gpg:using RSA key 0x1CE0C630 gpg: Good signature from "Werner Koch (dist sig) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" or D:\>gpg --verify gnupg-w32cli-1.4.3.exe.sig gpg: Signature made 04-Apr-2006 10:42:33 UTC gpg:using RSA key 0x1CE0C630 gpg: Good signature from "Werner Koch (dist sig) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" or (maybe the best way) D:\>gpg --verify gnupg-w32cli-1.4.3.exe.sig gpg: Signature made 04 April 2006 14:42:33 (local - Russian Daylight Time) gpg:using RSA key 0x1CE0C630 gpg: Good signature from "Werner Koch (dist sig) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" Suggestions are welcome. P.S. When I see output of PGPdump ( http://www.pgpdump.net/ ) it's much more easier to understand what date and time are shown and what time zone is used. -- Regards OpenPGP Key ID: 0x9E353B56500B8987 Encrypted e-mail preferred. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Date and time format
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:31:40AM +0400, lusfert wrote: > Hi. > > Is it possible to change date format in GPG output? GPG uses whatever the OS specifies as the date format. It is not something that is changeable by GPG - you need to set the date format in your OS. David ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Date and time format
David Shaw wrote on 07.04.2006 1:43: > On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:31:40AM +0400, lusfert wrote: >> Hi. >> >> Is it possible to change date format in GPG output? > > GPG uses whatever the OS specifies as the date format. It is not > something that is changeable by GPG - you need to set the date format > in your OS. > In my OS (Windows XP Pro SP2 + all updates) date format is set as dd.mm. : http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a142/someuser00/winxp_date_format.png (12 KB) Translation*: апреля = April пятница = Friday *Note that I use Russian language for date, time and other formats, but English version of Windows XP. However, GPG uses mm/dd/yy format... P.S. As you see can at the top of this message, my Thunderbird uses right date format (specified by OS): 07.04.2006 - dd.mm. -- Regards OpenPGP Key ID: 0x9E353B56500B8987 Encrypted e-mail preferred. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Date and time format
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 02:01:57AM +0400, lusfert wrote: > David Shaw wrote on 07.04.2006 1:43: > > On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:31:40AM +0400, lusfert wrote: > >> Hi. > >> > >> Is it possible to change date format in GPG output? > > > > GPG uses whatever the OS specifies as the date format. It is not > > something that is changeable by GPG - you need to set the date format > > in your OS. > > > > In my OS (Windows XP Pro SP2 + all updates) date format is set as > dd.mm. : > http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a142/someuser00/winxp_date_format.png > (12 KB) OS setting via LC_TIME, according to Microsoft, though I have no idea how to set it on win32. David ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Date and time format
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 David Shaw wrote: > OS setting via LC_TIME, according to Microsoft, though I have no idea > how to set it on win32. Right Click on the Clock, Select Setting Time/Date. JOHN ;) Timestamp: Thursday 06 Apr 2006, 18:36 --400 (Eastern Daylight Time) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4-4094cvs: (MingW32) Comment: Public Key at: http://tinyurl.com/8cpho Comment: Gossamer Spider Web of Trust (US26): http://www.gswot.org Comment: Homepage: http://tinyurl.com/9ubue Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJENZgRAAoJEBCGy9eAtCsPdQkH/1mu1LcrO8ed2ICdjqklBFrt QHRXrNk8LqdH/m3VqpxQ/EQ5ZQwhEz7zVOhPS0p3QEDr4/6QSHn4x42nEkYt9Luv UL0Lmop2apr0DXMxuRrHbWNMzp/LL1IEaQ979QP/aAk/B05I0E4rpTIEDZBjeEwY MtA2U4bDFf8mANBpl/Wv00aAH1vEp8nNyruH7/bwv09ApuIVGe8wajyZIvVywNFL MteXTCFXidL7Z9gDchukunp1WXdCeaN7Pj54F8EDayudkM6+ZyXxGlcEse10vJd/ fLV7fe0RisR+ji2Ii0dqy7SHtYwEK7MOF0vysuZe77sla97A2htAlgsehQ/I1t0= =9m1c -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Automated processes
Hi all, I'm new to GnuPG, and have been getting some help from a kind soul. I seem to have all the knowledge that I need with one single, but important, exception. When I decrypt, it asks for my passphrase. No problem there except for the fact that I want to have an automated script on a unix server perform the decryption of this file. Of course, if it needs a passphrase, it's going to hang and I can't have that. I know that for PGP, there's an environment setting that can be used to prevent this. Is there a similar thing for GnuPG, or do I have to jump through some hoops? Thanks, - Jack ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Automated processes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 jkaye wrote: > I know that for PGP, there's an environment setting that > can be used to prevent this. Is there a similar thing for > GnuPG, or do I have to jump through some hoops? Hmm.Let me see if I've understood you. You desire to use GPG for security 'Point to Point' then swap security for convenience on your end? My suggestion would be to either switch to Thunderbird w/Enigmail as your MUA. You can set Enigmail to 'remember' your passphrase for a specified length of time or until you Close the program. JOHN ;) Timestamp: Thursday 06 Apr 2006, 19:42 --400 (Eastern Daylight Time) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4-4094cvs: (MingW32) Comment: Public Key at: http://tinyurl.com/8cpho Comment: Gossamer Spider Web of Trust (US26): http://www.gswot.org Comment: Homepage: http://tinyurl.com/9ubue Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJENadvAAoJEBCGy9eAtCsPcecIAKLnkCbOlXQR7sWASIE0oaD7 8Kf7rMw+Me2CSNujNCG6hqPOr4Uh9fhrfAtSVnqoSuq9t96SR5XRpfm7b46K+P3j 1wLoYlwvEhpflhQaMe4x9awWEZDL4LUWswFU2Q9R/h3eDGyxAbXK1CR5vJ22XewJ 25aUAlvYyndcN9G9LPDM6ypOgjKE/+/WAZ06Jegqh9oFQc7tENR0NwfQvi192411 prOXFa3y8A46gswtffdK16FPDJiGiSmFgO+iq+tgWGYkMndH9mtHkY/r2vgBHoPZ xB/j9IWw33baG5Qe+XqZl8hkr5C8AVKZE+1KJjmx0lFM/SBSboYChDgPrJadAnA= =++kk -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Date and time format
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Was Fri, 07 Apr 2006, at 01:31:40 +0400, when lusfert wrote: > Is it possible to change date format in GPG output? I tried this to figure out many times but couldn't. I also expected that GPG will take over the local User's setting of the OS, as most programs do, but not, it doesn't. I don't know reasons. It would be very good and practical addition/correction making easier lots of administrative work. A time given in a logical format "-mm-dd hh:mm:ss [TZone]" (with the TZ expressed just numerically, as "[+0500]" and similar) would be perfect.[1] __ [1] The Time Zone expressed by abbreviations are a puzzle for many non American people, but for some Americans as well. - -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://blueness.port5.com/pgpkeys/ ~~~ For personal mail please use my address as it is *exactly* given in my "From|Reply To" field(s). ~~~ Respect thine opponent, else shall the earth rise up and smite thee on the back. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQEVAwUBRDWxOLSpHvHEUtv8AQj7Bwf/fyUfMHVYVGgLGduWqM6sMNRcmatir1Y9 plMDcQCvj7cjJ1nXNl5KtktXx/TGJA+n0ykzChX1Oy60JzLgsn0ImyKTl7bHpS4G 592WIgjR0IXCrwAp/Cbs6Jg1zR+qgWumZoWeLDprtFfw2IIwkAetaIG1cWbC/nhh iG9xa+qbvrYI4J9WI1+TbKyrCtEFVJdztpBxwK6601l34xd0vFo6hSt5mV+1+/EV ItHFl3aflo4YbfyDTcJLZ18jA7EeUFvSoYew/Uch4XIrANk17jMxtNEB2u2RrMFq Ctz5e3sKz251nUzgVUYrNi1a8yAzMjYSzYpELkshZhDm8mSVZput4Q== =0BDv -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
