On Wednesday 16 April 2008, Johannes Graumann wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have an issue with mail signatures in my mail setup and want to ask
> whether anybody has experienced something similar and/or where to
> look for a solution.
> I standardly MIME-sign my mail using kontact, the kde PIM.
I think i
Thanks for the prompt response Werner. I have a few more questions.
Werner Koch wrote:
>
> Right. The only way to do this from scripts is by using:
>
> gpg2 --status-fd 2 --command-fd 0 --gen-revoke foo
>
> The script needs to parse the status and react on it accordingly. Here
> is a sample
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, David Shaw wrote:
:Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:13:30 -0400
:From: David Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
:To: gnupg-users@gnupg.org
:Subject: Re: editing User ID
:
:On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:18:03AM -0500, rick wrote:
:> In setting up a user I managed to fat finger the email address.
:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:18:03AM -0500, rick wrote:
> In setting up a user I managed to fat finger the email address.
> The pgp documentation shows how to edit the user information using the -ke
> (key edit) flag, but I am unable to find a similar capability in gpg. I
> thought that possibly I
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:18:03AM -0500, rick wrote:
> In setting up a user I managed to fat finger the email address.
> The pgp documentation shows how to edit the user information using the -ke
> (key edit) flag, but I am unable to find a similar capability in gpg. I
> thought that possibly
In setting up a user I managed to fat finger the email address.
The pgp documentation shows how to edit the user information using the -ke
(key edit) flag, but I am unable to find a similar capability in gpg. I
thought that possibly I could remove the user id, then recreate the user
with the c
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 20:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Although it might not be necessary to backport 1.4.9's changes to 1.4.7,
> nobody can guarantee that there won't be a 1.4.10 that fixes a
> vulnerability which exists since 1.4.7.
Well as long as we maintain these versions we will provide the f
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Political solidarity, or "just following party line", are not sufficient
> justification to //some// people to move to move to a new (and to them
> possibly inferior) license. If a "stronger" reason was given on this
I can't see what problems a
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 01:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Meenal Pant wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> Can the "gpg --gen-revoke user" command be executed in batch mode? I am
>> trying to generate revocation certificate for a gpg keypair through a
>> Python script.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~
> $ gpg --batch --yes -
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:57,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>> What I meant are proofs based on the ability to decrypt a message. That
>> is not going to work if you do not have an encryption subkey.
> Could you please find the time to explain this further? Why would it
> only work with an encryption subk
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:11, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> http://wiki.linuxtag.net/w/Keysigning_2008
Please don't use this procedure - it just don't works. Within a group
of cryptographers it is a nice protocol but not in the real world.
The procedure does not cope with the problem that people don't
11 matches
Mail list logo
