Hello !
Why the Headers on this echo are not correct?
Messages come with this
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and it should be of course "gnupg-users@gnupg.org"
And there is no "Reply-To: gnupg-users@gnupg.org" Header.
--
Laurent Jumet
KeyID: 0xCFAF704C
_
Who encrypted the file, for whom, using what system?
Is it a text e-mail, or a stand-alone file?
If it is an encrypted text e-mail, can you post the actual encrypted
file? If not, can you URL a location where the actual file could be viewed?
I am not familiar with your system (I am a Mac user); ex
Hello, All! I use Thunderbird with Enigmail. For some reason, enigmail
will not sign and/or encrypt my messages (even when I manually click
encrypt). My keys work fine, and I can decrypt and verify already
encrypted and signed messages, but I can't do it myself. I have to
manually sign the message
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
engage wrote:
> Why is someone sending an encrypted message to this list?
It's not encrypted. It's just signed and armored.
Doesn't your mail client automatically display this for you?
- --
ToddOpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xD654075A | URL: www.pobox
Why is someone sending an encrypted message to this list?
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 09:12 pm, Alphax wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
>Version: GnuPG v1.4.4-svn4147:IDEA-TIGER192-DSA2 (MingW32)
>
>owNCWmg2MUFZJlNZeXIg9QABDH/3mvZv7d3u1u7+6/9u9+fv7zbr3P+Y
>et9XR/NAAbdzYbgyhoAA0aGgAAAB6gAAA
I am a complete newbie to GPG so bare with. I have a gpg encrypted file and
two .asc files... file_sec.asc and file.asc (pubilc and secret key? I have
no clue what the terminology is). I also have a passphrase that needs to be
used. I have been trying to get something on my windows machine ru
Todd Zullinger tmz at pobox.com wrote on
Thu Jun 1 11:46:48 CEST 2006 :
> While I prefer gnupg to pgp myself, I did just happen to see a
> reference to pgp command line today
the cost is *astronomical*
have played around with it when it was released as a free
command line pgp 8.5 beta
has a few
Hello !
Sven Radde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> But this is logical, isn't it?
>>> You don't trust a key (what's there to trust?). You trust the fact that
>>> *a certain key belongs to a certain user-id* and if new ids are added,
>>> you would have to think again if the owner of the key actuall
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Janusz A. Urbanowicz wrote:
> gpg integrates better with autimation and I really doubt that there is
> current, supported PGP for anything else than windows and mac.
While I prefer gnupg to pgp myself, I did just happen to see a
reference to pgp comma
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 01:59:37PM +0100, David Gray wrote:
> Will suggest to the customer that we use signed & encrypted
> transmissions. The only Issue we then have is that they wish to be
> custodians of the private key,
There is no need for them, from the cryptography point of view. Using
p
-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32)
owNCWmg2MUFZJlNZi1q7vwABAn/3/lJiuvJnV7X9/gxyP+/f4whZQALBEpCCgYQQ
QBshMAFlQQaghT2kwpkPUZAekAPUAAAD0mmQeo9IB6mjTQeo9qnqDUyTAjQjJppN
qmn6oAB5Tyh6IAMgAADyjygD1BkOGgGgANAaA0AAADTRpoAyAAAaNMgx1aBLX3en
1PYzeWxPmZ31iEAjwF6YzDunLCUGzjBsaVxPa4PT98n
-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32)
owNCWmg2MUFZJlNZLMzs4gABJn//+nIoAvQXV7X9/EYAP///4QTQSoJBJo7hAQKA
EAAYAogwAYltKwamplJtNJ7UmJ6gNMQ9IMEA0aNoIbUaAaaMGk9IYyDU0mBNAKZN
Gg0AAeoBoA00NBkAaCEp5I/VG0yhkNBoaA0yAGgAANB0L26igoXVF92F
EW5m9AAD3g6khlhsgcvJru0hRj/8XZzD+ggTIjgCGcE
-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32)
owNCWmg2MUFZJlNZvE3tWgAByP/3+nYhAmBn//X//92YP+f/4RBBRo3MIoeA0kAA
i0oQQAJHZ3cZxcImkmFPGqaep5Q9TQ2piZPUNPUeoAGhoZAGQB6hoHqGQNPRP1Qi
aAphkp5DTJMmQaNAADRoABqp+TRGpiNI9INAGgaBpoAAAGgAAAan
pRlTyNED0jIzUAaBoBoDQ0AGQGgaBAyIhXffQNN
13 matches
Mail list logo
