On 3/6/2012 8:03 PM, Alastair Langwell wrote:
Hi folks,
I wonder if any of you can help with this problem
(http://www.mozilla-enigmail.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=838&p=3409)
on Enigmail? I'd appreciate it and promise I'll post any solutions into
that forum thread!
Many thanks in advance,
Al
On 3/6/12 8:03 PM, Alastair Langwell wrote:
> I wonder if any of you can help with this problem on Enigmail?
Contrary to your statement on the forum post, it is almost definitely
*not* an Enigmail issue. This is a straightforward permissions issue.
Somehow you managed to chown everything in $HOME
Hi folks,
I wonder if any of you can help with this problem
(http://www.mozilla-enigmail.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=838&p=3409)
on Enigmail? I'd appreciate it and promise I'll post any solutions into
that forum thread!
Many thanks in advance,
Alastair Langwell
Key: E2F6 3C0F 21BB 5DEB 32BF AC
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
El 06-03-2012 16:58, Peter Lebbing escribió:
...
> The keyservers don't do any validation on revocation certificates;
> anyone who feels like it can add /invalid/ revocation certificates
> to your key to annoy you. But as soon as OpenPGP software imp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
El 06-03-2012 15:59, auto15963...@hushmail.com escribió:
...
> I do in fact use gpg-agent and a cache >0, but this machine is not
> in a workplace or public location. It is in my home, in a place
> where visitors have no access, and my family woul
On 06/03/12 22:31, Hauke Laging wrote:
> AFAIK there is nearly no skill level required in order to get into an average
> user account. There is software which creates malware. You don't have to
> write it yourself. Just wait for the next exploit in a widely used (or known
> to be used) software.
Am Dienstag, 6. März 2012, 22:00:05 schrieb Peter Lebbing:
> On 06/03/12 21:14, Hauke Laging wrote:
> > You probably don't even use a seperate user account for key handling.
>
> I don't even do that either.
So don't I.
> Sounds to me like mainly snake oil with an
> insignificantly reduced actua
On 06/03/12 21:14, Hauke Laging wrote:
> You probably don't even use a seperate user account for key handling.
I don't even do that either. Sounds to me like mainly snake oil with an
insignificantly reduced actual hacking risk.
To clarify, an attacker is able to get into your personal user accoun
On 03/06/2012 01:36 PM, auto15963...@hushmail.com wrote:
> Looking at this instruction, I think you assume that I have
> imported the revoked key onto my keyring. I have not done so. On
> my keyring is the valid key, which is not revoked. The revoked key
> appears to be on a keyserver. When I
Am Dienstag, 6. März 2012, 19:36:07 schrieb auto15963...@hushmail.com:
> I agree that user error is a possibility, but I am not certain how
> to prove it. I can reproduce another public key just like the one
> that was revoked except using a different name.
I do not see any possible user error du
On 06/03/12 19:36, auto15963...@hushmail.com wrote:
> The revoked key appears to be on a keyserver. When I do a search and view
> the result online, I can see my key ID number and user ID plainly identifying
> this key as having now been revoked. I have not imported it.
The keyservers don't do a
> -Original Message-
> From: gnupg-users-boun...@gnupg.org [mailto:gnupg-users-
boun...@gnupg.org]
> On Behalf Of Ingo Klöcker
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 3:37 PM
> To: gnupg-users@gnupg.org
> Subject: Re: invalid gpg key revocation
>
> On Sunday 04 March 2012, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>
Okay, there are a lot of responses, and I need to get to the bottom
of this as quickly as possible, but I also want to do so
methodically. Let me respond to the points raised as best I can
until this is resolved.
> -Original Message-
> From: gnupg-users-boun...@gnupg.org [mailto:gnupg
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
14 matches
Mail list logo
