Perhaps the best approach to this is a simple script.
gpg --encrypt --recipient %2 --output %1.pgp %1
You could expand on it. Shouldn't be a problem for
any environment.
--- Ismael Valladolid Torres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Most often, recipients of my encrypted files are
> users of legacy
Faine, Mark wrote:
> I've configured system account mail (root, postmaster, etc) to be sent
> to a user account and then that user account is using a .forward file to
> send the mail to my workstation where I can review it. I would like to
> do the same but include an encrypt/sign step into the pr
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 04:21:32PM -0500, Alex Mauer wrote:
> The UID format is also problematic IMO. GPG (OpenPGP?) strongly
> "wants" to have a Name and an email address for each UID. I think
> that this puts emphasis in a bad place, leading people to be signing
> the fact that e.g. "Alex Maue
I've configured system account mail (root, postmaster, etc) to be sent
to a user account and then that user account is using a .forward file to
send the mail to my workstation where I can review it. I would like to
do the same but include an encrypt/sign step into the process.
I have created m
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> And the final 'objection' is more of a philosophical one: what is IDENTITY?
> If I know a person only by email, then that email *is* the person to me.
> And I know many people just by email and we are probably never going to
> meet IRL, except for some strange coincid
If anything needs to change it is that the documentation
I can more and more see that thanks to everybody's willingness on
this list to explain.
That is exactly my point, NOBODY should rely on ANY of that
information to
identify a key. The only identifier for a key is the fingerprint.
B. Kuestner wrote:
Coming as a newbie to all of this, I'd say there's a long way to go
until this whole thing is ready for my Mom to use it. And I think
that's what we eventually want to do, right? That encrypted messaging
becomes the norm, not the exception.
Public key systems that atte
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 09:13:51AM +0200, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:03:46 +0200, Joost van Baal said:
>
> > I am having troubles getting S/MIME emails (or CMS blobs) processed by
> > GPGME.
> Check out how Mutt does it. In particular the file crypt-gpgme.c from
> the 1.5.x seri
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:03:46 +0200, Joost van Baal said:
> I am having troubles getting S/MIME emails (or CMS blobs) processed by
> GPGME. (Since GPGME uses libksba, it _should_ be able to handle these,
> I guess).
Yes, it does.
> For instance, when creating a detached-signed S/MIME email messa
