Faine, Mark writes:
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 proce
Neil Williams wrote:
No, because you've separated the two - there has to be a reason to do this and
therefore you are implying that there is a difference between the two UID's.
There is. It is nearly impossible to verify with complete certainty
that the person you meet is in fact able to acc
Hi everybody.
(First of all sorry for crossposting to *devel and *users,.. I supposed
users list would be the appropriate,.. but Werner supposed *devel,.. so
I took both)
I have lots of general and specific questions about OpenPGP/GnuPG.
First of all I'd like to say that I've already read mos
Instead of --decrypt, use
gpg --use-embedded-filename myfile.pgp
--- Wes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry, I earlier posted this with an old thread in
> the subject.
>
> PGP 9 stores the file name in the encrypted data.
> You can take a file
> xyz.pgp, decrypt it, and return it to the orig
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 02:50:30PM -0500, Wes wrote:
> I hope this isn't something already discussed that I overlooked in the
> list..
>
> PGP 9 stores the file name in the encrypted data. You can take a file
> xyz.pgp, decrypt it, and return it to the original "My Word Doc.DOC". There
> is noth
I hope this isn't something already discussed that I overlooked in the
list..
PGP 9 stores the file name in the encrypted data. You can take a file
xyz.pgp, decrypt it, and return it to the original "My Word Doc.DOC". There
is nothing externally visible, either in a PGP Partitioned message, nor
Sorry, I earlier posted this with an old thread in the subject.
PGP 9 stores the file name in the encrypted data. You can take a file
xyz.pgp, decrypt it, and return it to the original "My Word Doc.DOC". There
is nothing externally visible, either in a PGP Partitioned message, nor in a
hex dump
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 08:01:15PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
>
> I wouldn't sign the email only one because an email address can be accessible
> to more than one person. If I'm encrypting to this key, I want to know to
> WHOM I am writing.
>
In some cases you can't to WHOM you are writing. Wh
On Wednesday 26 October 2005 6:26 pm, Alex Mauer wrote:
> Right, so why is it any better to have a key with:
> 0x99242560 David Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> than to have
> 0x99242560 David Shaw
> 0x99242560 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (two UIDs)
>
> You still have the same level of disambiguation.
No, bec
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
I have the gpgol-0.9.3 plug-in installed in Outlook 2003 running on
Windows XP Pro.
It resolved the 'crash on signing' issues I was having with the older
plug-in, thanks!
Now I have a couple of questions:
Is there a way to set the default key t
David Shaw wrote:
>>>Some people
>>>will not sign such a user ID though,
>
> It's not an issue of improving the trust, it's an issue of
> disambiguation.
Right, so why is it any better to have a key with:
0x99242560 David Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
than to have
0x99242560 David Shaw
0x99242560
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 21:37:06 +0200, Peter Engel said:
> I have a class-2 cardreader (meaning: with integreated keypad for
> entering the PIN). I found no clue yet wether GnuPG supports the
> integrated keypad for entering the PIN. (using GnuPG v.1.4.2)
I am working on this. It has turned out to
Joost van Baal wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 11:38:49PM -0400, David Shaw wrote:
It's not an issue of improving the trust, it's an issue of
disambiguation. In my case, there are many different David Shaws out
there, including a furniture designer in New Zealand, a Pulitzer prize
winning journ
Am 11 Sep 2005 um 23:01 hat David Shaw geschrieben:
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 09:59:53AM -0500, John Clizbe wrote:
> > David Shaw wrote:
> > > There is perhaps an argument to be made for a
> > > "super clean" that does clean and also removes any
> > > signature where the signing key is
> > > not
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 11:38:49PM -0400, David Shaw wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 08:50:11PM -0500, Alex Mauer wrote:
> > David Shaw wrote:
> > >Some people (myself included) check both before signing. The name via
> > >some sort of formal ID, and the email via a mail challenge.
> >
> > As do
15 matches
Mail list logo
