On Mon Jun 06 2005; 10:39, Peter Schott wrote:
> Current running WinPT and the Outlook plugin. Those would be the only
> programs I can think of that would be touching the keyring.
As I said, WinPT never writes the files directly. I heard about one or
two where something similar happened, but no
On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 16:16:54 +0200, Sascha Kiefer said:
> The PGP/MIME RFC states that you can first sign and then encrypt the mail.
Doing this on the MIME level allows you to easily strip the encryption
layer while leaving the signature intact.
> In S/MIME it is allowed to first encrypt and the
">
Your are mixing up two things: The statement that you checked the
owneership of the key at a certain date and how far you trust the
owner of the key to implement decent keymanagment abilities.
I know that the OpenPGP group has taken great pains to not define trust. It
leaves trust to be defi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At 00:39 2005-06-06, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>If I'm not misinformed the passphrase can be encoded using different
>character sets. Can I in gpg change witch one is used, or does it depend
>on witch operating system I use? How does it affect the way you cal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
And I'll add that most rsync servers I've used usually keep things set
at 7 for a balance between processor cost and compression rates. If
processor cost is an issue for you, it pays to test a few of the
compression levels out to see what's acceptable.
Timo, I'm using 1.4.1 on my PC. I was just a little concerned as I
don't use GPG on a regular basis so when something reports that one of
my keyrings is corrupt, it's probably one of my manager-type programs.
Current running WinPT and the Outlook plugin. Those would be the only
programs I can th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Is there a good way to send signed HTML email messages? If I understand
the problems come up when gpg thinks an html tag is a gpg tag. So
pgp/mime solves this problem?
- -Francis
Patrick Brunschwig wrote:
>
> Maybe you should disable composition of
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 10:40:05AM +0300, Oskar L. wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Using the release candidate for version 1.4.2, I imported my public and
> secret key, and just like with version 1.4.1 I got double self-signatures
> on it.
Yes. This will happen with any version. It depends on what version
of
Werner Koch schrieb:
The first of course.
Shalom-Salam,
Werner
Okay, perfekt.
The PGP/MIME RFC states that you can first sign and then encrypt the mail.
In S/MIME it is allowed to first encrypt and then sign the message.
Do you think it's feasible to do the same in PGP/MIME? I think it i
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 21:46:12 -0400, Anonymous said:
> Well if I know that the person is lazy, and keeps the key on an
> unsecure computer and it is likely that within one year the key will
> be compromized, I would sign with a one year expiration date. Basicly
Your are mixing up two things: The s
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 10:21:51 +0300 (EEST), Oskar L said:
> May I ask why you, or anyone, would want to do this? If I get a public key
> with a signature from someone who's key I have verified and who I trust to
> check keys properly, then why should it matter to me if that signature has
The signat
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 13:45:30 +0200, Kiefer, Sascha said:
> Well, as far as i see there is no difference between the MIME format of
> rfc2015 and rfc3156.
Correct, 3156 has only minor clarifications.
> So, what is right?
> RFC like:
> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5
> prot
Hi,
if you want me to create a Spanish speaking user list, just tell me
along with a commitment to do some moderation.
Salam-Shalom,
Werner
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 11:36:32 +0200, Martin Geisler said:
> I don't know how Outlook (not Express) handles things.
It won't be possible to verify a signature with Outlook due to the
fact that it is not possible to get to the raw MIME headers. It might
be possible to write a plugin which uses heur
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 11:35:12 -0700 (PDT), William Bradshaw said:
> Does anyone have a listing of error/status codes
> returned by GnuPG when attempting to decrypt files?
See the description of status codes in doc/DETAILS. There are no
specific error codes except for 0 = success and not 0 = some k
"Oskar L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also, let's say it is known that the characters in a passphrase has
> been selected from the 64 ASCII characters A-Z, a-z, 0-9, # and $.
> This will give each character an entropy of 6 bits (log2(64)), witch
> if I understand correctly means that 6 of the 8
Hi Dan,
* Dan Mundy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [04. Jun. 2005]:
> Found a problem!! Weird one though...
>
> when setting key trust with enigmail for Thunderbird, the openpgp
> management gives me an 'undefined error', but after this, it changes the
> trust as if nothing went wrong. I even was the light
17 matches
Mail list logo
