Re: gnupg / enigmail excessive processing times

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, > On 24/6/19 12:14 am, The Wanderer wrote: >> The short version of this is that I think I need to clear out a >> lot of irrelevant keys / signatures, et cetera, from my gnupg >> configuration - but I don't want to do anything which risks losing

Re: gnupg / enigmail excessive processing times

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, On 24/6/19 12:14 am, The Wanderer wrote: > The short version of this is that I think I need to clear out a > lot of irrelevant keys / signatures, et cetera, from my gnupg > configuration - but I don't want to do anything which risks losing > m

Re: gnupg / enigmail excessive processing times

On 2019-06-23 at 13:32, Teemu Likonen wrote: > The Wanderer [2019-06-23 11:46:34-04:00] wrote: > >> On 2019-06-23 at 11:23, Teemu Likonen wrote: >>> If you add line "auto-key-retrieve" to your ~/.gnupg/gpg.conf >>> then GnuPG will automatically try to retrieve keys from >>> keyservers when you ve

Re: gnupg / enigmail excessive processing times

The Wanderer [2019-06-23 11:46:34-04:00] wrote: > On 2019-06-23 at 11:23, Teemu Likonen wrote: >> If you add line "auto-key-retrieve" to your ~/.gnupg/gpg.conf then >> GnuPG will automatically try to retrieve keys from keyservers when >> you verify a signature made by an unknown key. > An interes

Re: gnupg / enigmail excessive processing times

On 2019-06-23 at 11:23, Teemu Likonen wrote: > The Wanderer [2019-06-23 10:14:19-04:00] wrote: > >> Some years ago, I got tired of manually importing the key every >> time I saw a signed message through the Debian mailing lists for >> which I didn't already have the necessary public key. > > If

Re: gnupg / enigmail excessive processing times

The Wanderer [2019-06-23 10:14:19-04:00] wrote: > Some years ago, I got tired of manually importing the key every time I > saw a signed message through the Debian mailing lists for which I didn't > already have the necessary public key. If you add line "auto-key-retrieve" to your ~/.gnupg/gpg.con

Re: GnuPG with OpenPGP card implementation

Thank you for your information. On 2013-10-09 at 22:26 -0400, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: > I have a built-in smartcard reader on my laptop: > > Bus 002 Device 004: ID 0a5c:5800 Broadcom Corp. BCM5880 Secure > Applications Processor > > And then I have a USB SCM331 reader I got while on a government

Re: GnuPG with OpenPGP card implementation

I actually use my v2.0 OpenPGP card daily and have just been notified that my new order was just shipped today. I have a built-in smartcard reader on my laptop: Bus 002 Device 004: ID 0a5c:5800 Broadcom Corp. BCM5880 Secure Applications Processor And then I have a USB SCM331 reader I got whi

RE: gnupg on etch RC1

I figured it out at last:) This was because gpgv package. When I installed it - I was able to upgrade this gnupg at last:) -Original Message- From: Florian Kulzer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:22 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: gnupg on etch

Re: gnupg on etch RC1

On Sun, Nov 19, 2006 at 19:55:21 +0200, Debeselis wrote: > Hi, > > I noticed one strange thing: > > goblinas:/etc/init.d# apt-show-versions -u > gnupg/etch upgradeable from 1.4.5-1 to 1.4.5-2 > > goblinas:/etc/init.d# aptitude upgrade > Reading package lists... Done > Building dependency tree...

Re: gnupg stopped accepting my passphrase (ack!)

On Tuesday 14 February 2006 22:08, David Scott Coburn wrote: > > This is a bit bizarre. Well, it seems to be working now. I have no clue what the trouble was. Either pilot error, or some problem that took a few reboots to cure. Thanks for the help. Scott -- : David Scott Coburn : "Assume a s

Re: gnupg stopped accepting my passphrase (ack!)

> Any ideas? > > Thanks, > > Scott > You could try replacing your ~/.gnupg with a backup in case something really unexplainable happened to it. Besides the funny characters theory and the "unexplainable" I have no idea what could have happened. jorge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PRO

Re: gnupg stopped accepting my passphrase (ack!)

On Tuesday 14 February 2006 04:41, Jon Dowland wrote: > > That's the only think occurring to me - try entering your passphrase at > a terminal prompt (rather than the GPG passphrase prompt) -- do you see > what you expect, or are some characters incorrect? I tried with a console login (rather than

Re: gnupg stopped accepting my passphrase (ack!)

On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 07:42:09PM -0500, David Scott Coburn wrote: > I am running Debian Etch on my computer. After doing a dist-upgrade > last night gnupg stopped accepting my passphrases. > It seems that perhaps it is a keyboard/encoding/locale problem of some > sort? That's the only think oc

Re: Gnupg - upgrade a trustdb?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:05:35 -0600 Jacob S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:27:12 -0600 > John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Jacob writes: > > > So, I figure there must

Re: Gnupg - upgrade a trustdb?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:27:12 -0600 John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jacob writes: > > So, I figure there must be some way to 'upgrade' the trustdb so > > that I can fetch new keys without corrupting the trustdb, but I > > don't know what it is

Re: Gnupg - upgrade a trustdb?

Jacob writes: > So, I figure there must be some way to 'upgrade' the trustdb so that I > can fetch new keys without corrupting the trustdb, but I don't know what > it is. Anyone have any advice on a good way to fix this? I'd try deleting the trustdb and letting gpg rebuild it. -- John Hasler --

Re: GnuPG can not read some pgp signatures

LeVA wrote: [snip] > And when I Save the attached signature, and run cat signature.asc | > gpg --import, I get this messages: > gpg: no valid OpenPGP data found. > gpg: Total number processed: 0 If those files are really data signatures, then this is to be expected. Do you mean keys or key signa

Re: GnuPG can not read some pgp signatures

Incoming from LeVA: > > I have installed KMail a few days ago, and with it I've installed the > GnuPG program too. But some of the signatures can not be read by gpg. There's a discussion going on in debian-security on this. Suffice to say, some mailers use deprecated/obsolete mime tags, and som

Re: GNUPG: down from v1.2.0 to v1.0.6

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:45:01 +0200 daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Abdul Latip wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Since I have less clue on keeping the pace of SARGE, > > I have down-graded back to WOODY. > > > > The problem is that the GNUPG keys made by version > > 1.2.0 can not be read by version 1.0

Re: GNUPG: down from v1.2.0 to v1.0.6

Abdul Latip wrote: Hi, Since I have less clue on keeping the pace of SARGE, I have down-graded back to WOODY. The problem is that the GNUPG keys made by version 1.2.0 can not be read by version 1.0.6. May I know, if there is a quick and dirty way to convert? regards, I am in the same situation as

Re: GnuPG, self signature not trusted

* Ismael Valladolid Torres ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030916 11:26]: > Hi, > > When verifying a signature created by myself, I get: > > $ gpg --verify bookmarks.asc > gpg: Signature made Tue Sep 16 19:06:09 2003 CEST using DSA key ID > 1542E793 > gpg: Good signature from "Ismael Valladolid Torres <[EMA

Re: GnuPG on stable?

* Peter Lavender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20030322 21:31 PST]: > > > So I add this to my sources.list file and then apt-get install gnupg? > > > > Why don't you read "Installation" at: > > http://www.fs.tum.de/~bunk/packages/#SECTION0008 > > and figure it out? > > Yep... hit g too so

Re: GnuPG on stable?

> > So I add this to my sources.list file and then apt-get install gnupg? > > Why don't you read "Installation" at: > http://www.fs.tum.de/~bunk/packages/#SECTION0008 > and figure it out? Yep... hit g too soon. Pete :wq -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a s

RE: GnuPG on stable?

> -Original Message- > From: Peter Lavender [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 10:05 PM > To: Travis Crump > Cc: Debian User List > Subject: Re: GnuPG on stable? > > So I add this to my sources.list file and then apt-get install gnu

Re: GnuPG on stable?

* Travis Crump ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > >The "problem" is that gnupg is at version 1.0.6, but there are more recent > >versions available. > > > >Just how does one go about updating something like gpg to a newer version > >with out breaking the package management system? > > > >

Re: GnuPG on stable?

Peter Lavender wrote: The "problem" is that gnupg is at version 1.0.6, but there are more recent versions available. Just how does one go about updating something like gpg to a newer version with out breaking the package management system? has 1.2.1-1 -- To U

Re: Gnupg & Evolution

On Thu, 2002-06-20 at 07:50, James Cameron wrote: > On Wed, 2002-06-19 at 18:59, Helgi Örn wrote: > > I have this annoying problem with Evolution and gnupg; when I click a > > message lock icon to check the signature Evolution often hangs before > > the lock opens. I then have to brutally kill it a

Re: Gnupg & Evolution

On Wed, 2002-06-19 at 18:59, Helgi Örn wrote: > I have this annoying problem with Evolution and gnupg; when I click a > message lock icon to check the signature Evolution often hangs before > the lock opens. I then have to brutally kill it and start anew. Do you have network connection at the same

Re: gnuPG keys

begin Greg C. Madden quotation: > Someone brought to my attention here, thanks, that searching on my key > ID number does not get any results from a key server. I have verified > this on: > http://wwwkeys.us.pgp.net/pgpnet > http://www.keyserver.net/en/ You are not gonna believe this, Greg, but T

SOLUTION (Re: GNUPG and multiple keyservers?)

Andras BALI ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Sun, Nov 11, 2001 at 08:43:37PM -0800, Ron Farrer wrote: > > > Does anyone know if it is possible to get GNUPG to use multiple > > keyservers? > > AFAIK it's not possible. > > > I'm running GNUPG 1.0.6-2. Basically what I would like to do > > is have

Re: GNUPG and multiple keyservers?

Thus spake Ron Farrer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Basically what I would like to do is have GNUPG request a key from > keyring.debian.org and if it's not found then try > seattle.keyserver.net. An alternate, somewhat-similar suggestion would be to use seattle.keyserver.net as your keyserver but do th

Re: GNUPG and multiple keyservers?

On Sun, Nov 11, 2001 at 08:43:37PM -0800, Ron Farrer wrote: > Does anyone know if it is possible to get GNUPG to use multiple > keyservers? AFAIK it's not possible. > I'm running GNUPG 1.0.6-2. Basically what I would like to do > is have GNUPG request a key from keyring.debian.org and if it's no

Re: GnuPG

No problem. Please upload your public key so your signature can be verified. Perhaps... gpg --keyserver keys.pgp.com --send-keys gashuffer09 Mike On Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 06:21:38PM -0400, Stephen Gran wrote: > Sorry about that mess - I've benn trying to get GnuPG working, and

Re: GnuPG

Sorry about that mess - I've benn trying to get GnuPG working, and I (obviously) set a few things wrong. My bad. It seems to be better now. Steve -- ... most of us learned about love the hard way. Even warnings are probably useless, for somehow, despite the severest warnings of parents and frie

Re: GnuPG

You seem to have it working pretty well. -- Neo: I don't know the future. I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end. I came here to tell how it's going to begin. I'm going to hang up this phone, and then show these people what you don't want them to see. I'm going to show them a wor

Re: GnuPG

On Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 04:09:55PM -0400, Stephen Gran wrote: Is there any particular reason you are sending encrypted email to a public mailing list? Mike -- Michael P. Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, GnuPG pub key: 5BC8BE08 "Pretty soon, massive bloat is the industry standard and everyon

Re: GnuPG

binmi2g52zwAH.bin Description: application/pgp-encrypted msg.asc Description: Binary data

Re: gnupg & gnus

> "Christoph" == Christoph Groth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Christoph> Hi, I'm using Gnus for reading mail & news and I like Christoph> it very much. Christoph> Is there anyone successfully using gnus with gnupg out Christoph> there? I just wanted to ask if it's worth the ef

Re: gnupg & gnus

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Christoph Groth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is there anyone successfully using gnus with gnupg out there? I just > wanted to ask if it's worth the effort trying it. Yep, and it wasn't too hard to set up. Key fetching and message decryption aren't

Re: GnuPG can't Check signature msg?

Thanks for taking the time on this answer. I've read it. Understood 90 pers cent, and have it on file to study further:) > correct, and with all the accuracy of the sender's clock. Good. > The public key, as the name implies, is often available to anyone > through the public keyservers: GNU PG i

Re: GnuPG can't Check signature msg?

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 04:09:30PM +0100, Jonathan Gift wrote: > Hi, > > I installed the GnuPG and set up my own publick key and while most of > the msg headers to do withnot finding pgp on pgp using email are gone, > one remains: > > gpg: Signature made Mon Dec 11... > gpg: Can't check signature

Re: GnuPG: problem installing on Woody

On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 11:15:32PM +0200, Frederik wrote: > > I've a strange problem with GnuPG: I can install it correctly without any > errors, but when i run gpg, i get the following error: > gpg: /usr/lib/gnupg/rsa: error loading > extension: /usr/lib/gnupg/rsa: cannot open shared object file

Re: OT: Mailing list help (was Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody)

begin Chris Gray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) quotation (Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 07:13:55PM -0400): > On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 02:28:38PM -0700, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > If the person had enough experience (to be completely distinguished from > > intelligence, these are totally different aspects [1]) t

Re: OT: Mailing list help (was Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody)

On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 02:28:38PM -0700, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > If the person had enough experience (to be completely distinguished from > intelligence, these are totally different aspects [1]) to know what to post, > they would have done so in the first place. As he or she did not, I'm >

Re: OT: Mailing list help (was Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody)

On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 11:23:54AM -0400, Chris Gray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 02:27:04AM -0700, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > Better more data than less, particularly if I ask for it. I've been > > getting mightily peeved lately by people who post "how do I solve foo

Re: OT: Mailing list help (was Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody)

Chris Gray writes: > So instead of just saying "post output of ", say "if > returns foo then do bar, if it returns baz then do quux, > otherwise post it and let me have a look at it." I've tried that. More often than not the person asking for help gets lost, fails to perform all the steps, and p

Re: OT: Mailing list help (was Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody)

On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 04:35:39PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 11:23:54AM -0400, Chris Gray wrote: > > > When you say "post output of ", you probably have some > > idea what's going on but want confirmation (otherwise, you'd just be > > adding noise). > > Often that's not

Re: OT: Mailing list help (was Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody)

On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 11:23:54AM -0400, Chris Gray wrote: > When you say "post output of ", you probably have some > idea what's going on but want confirmation (otherwise, you'd just be > adding noise). Often that's not the case - people frequently ask questions but don't provide nearly enoug

OT: Mailing list help (was Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody)

On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 02:27:04AM -0700, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > Better more data than less, particularly if I ask for it. I've been > getting mightily peeved lately by people who post "how do I solve foo" > to which I reply "post output of "...which never happens. > I'm going to start kill

Re: GnuPG: problem installing on Woody

On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Frederik wrote: > Normally, gnupg should provide gpg-rsa, if I can rely on dpkg, so I'll try > to play around with that idea in mind a little more, but I'm not very > optimistic... In reply to myself: everything seems to be OK now. I purged everything relating to gnupg, gpg-r

Re: GnuPG: problem installing on Woody

Well, after I did an apt-get upgrade this morning, I saw GnuPG being upgraded (Version: 1.0.4-1), and I hoped my problem would have solved itself. It didn't. So, what I did next was: apt-get -b gpg-rsa, which downloads and builds 2 packages, gpg-rsa and gpg-idea (both _2.1.1). Installing these did

Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody

On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 11:03:55AM +0200, Frederik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > Which gpg do you have installed? Post output of: > > > > $ gpg --version > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ gpg --version > gpg (GnuPG) 1.0.3 > Copyright (C) 2000 Free

Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody

On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > Which gpg do you have installed? Post output of: > > $ gpg --version [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ gpg --version gpg (GnuPG) 1.0.3 Copyright (C) 2000 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. This is free software

Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody

On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 12:00:40AM +, Pollywog ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On 19-Oct-2000 kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > > Which gpg do you have installed? Post output of: > > > > $ gpg --version > > $ dpkg -s gnupg > > $ dpkg -s gpg-rsa > > I upgraded gnupg yesterday and

Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody

On 19-Oct-2000 kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > Which gpg do you have installed? Post output of: > > $ gpg --version > $ dpkg -s gnupg > $ dpkg -s gpg-rsa I upgraded gnupg yesterday and gpg-rsa was removed in the process (Woody). -- Andrew

Re: GnuPG: prblem installing on Woody

On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 11:15:32PM +0200, Frederik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Hi, > > I've a strange problem with GnuPG: I can install it correctly without any > errors, but when i run gpg, i get the following error: > gpg: /usr/lib/gnupg/rsa: error loading > extension: /usr/lib/gnupg/rsa: canno

Re: gnupg, openssh post RSA patent/US encryption export laws

I don't know much about this, and I think it's worthwhile to investigate it more fully before moving anything, but I will give one data point: Recently an email was sent out to the OpenSSL developers list stating that they have thoroughly vetted the new changes in U.S. law/regulations/whatever, an

Re: gnupg, openssh post RSA patent/US encryption export laws

Rino Mardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >There's now an ongoing vote among developers on what to do with >non-free/non-US software thus affecting the Social Contract. Check the >social contract after this month. A correction: the proposed General Resolution in question doesn't affect non-US. -- C

Re: gnupg, openssh post RSA patent/US encryption export laws

"E. Jay Berkenbilt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >[I'm not currently subscribed to this list, so please cc me on responses.] Done. >After about September 20, the RSA patent has expired in the USA. >Also, earlier this year, the USA finally relaxed its export laws >concerning encryption software. (T

Re: gnupg, openssh post RSA patent/US encryption export laws

On Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 01:16:34AM -0400 or thereabouts, E. Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > > [I'm not currently subscribed to this list, so please cc me on responses.] > > After about September 20, the RSA patent has expired in the USA. > Also, earlier this year, the USA finally relaxed its export laws

Re: gnupg, openssh post RSA patent/US encryption export laws

Hmm, not sure, but I thought there was actually a change in regulations. If so, regulations have the force of law and are more difficult to change (requires public notice and hearings). Still, they can be changed without a change in the enabling legislation. -- /bin/sh ~/.signature: Command not

Re: gnupg, openssh post RSA patent/US encryption export laws

On Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 01:16:34AM -0400, E. Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > > [I'm not currently subscribed to this list, so please cc me on responses.] > > After about September 20, the RSA patent has expired in the USA. > Also, earlier this year, the USA finally relaxed its export laws > concerning en

Re: gnupg help

> And then select the old uid with "uid" and delete it with "deluid". > > Hubert But there is a problem with publically distributed keys, as someone (Ethan, I think) pointed out in the "previous" (Nietzsche: Die ewige Wiederkehr des Gleichen ...IIRC) thread. Here is the gnupg-handbook speaking:

Re: gnupg help

Vee-Eye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2) You could add an > uid to your key ("gpg --edit-key " and then with "adduid" add the > new address). And then select the old uid with "uid" and delete it with "deluid". Hubert

Re: gnupg help

On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 09:52:58PM +0200, Vee-Eye wrote: > > Hello people, > > Hi Carlos, > > The question sounds quiet familiar to me; I think you asked that one a couple > of days before and got some answers already, but anyway ... Yes, I too remember this... > > 1) Why don't you generate a

Re: gnupg help

> Hello people, Hi Carlos, The question sounds quiet familiar to me; I think you asked that one a couple of days before and got some answers already, but anyway ... 1) Why don't you generate a new key ("gpg --gen-key")? 2) You could add an uid to your key ("gpg --edit-key " and then with "add

Re: gnupg help

On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 07:30:12AM +0200, Vee-Eye wrote: > Generating a new key would be the best solution, that's right. But have a look > at the " yourkey" menu. [You could add an uid () and > then > delete the old one (surprise: ] except if you already have uploaded to a keyserver you won't b

Re: gnupg help

Sie schrieben: > > On 05-Sep-2000 Carlos Laviola wrote: > > Hello people, > > > > I know this is not Debian-related in any way, so please forgive me for > > posting here. My question is: is there a way to change a e-mail address in > > a gnupg key? My previous ISP (sol.com.br) is gone now, so I a

RE: gnupg help

On 05-Sep-2000 Carlos Laviola wrote: > Hello people, > > I know this is not Debian-related in any way, so please forgive me for > posting here. My question is: is there a way to change a e-mail address in > a gnupg key? My previous ISP (sol.com.br) is gone now, so I am using a new > one, with a n

Re: GnuPG stands for ...?

At 09:23 AM 12/25/99 -0800, Fish Smith wrote: >Okay, if PGP stands for Pretty Good Privacy, does that >mean GnuPG stands for GNU Pretty Good?  I don't know >how this title conveys encryption... My guess is that the full name is recursive AND a palindrome.  GnuPGPunG, folded back over itself (in t

Re: GnuPG stands for ...?

On Sat, Dec 25, 1999 at 09:23:20AM -0800, Fish Smith wrote: > Okay, if PGP stands for Pretty Good Privacy, does that > mean GnuPG stands for GNU Pretty Good? I don't know > how this title conveys encryption... Gnu Privacy Guard. -- Weaselhttp://www.cosy.sbg.ac.at/~pp