On 04/09/2014 10:16 PM, John Clizbe wrote:
> Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>>> The “secure communications” paradigm of course spans a whole spectrum
>>> from “I don’t give a ” to “I’ll do anything to protect my
>>> communications, including giving away my first born”. I suspect the
>>> “average Joe u
> backlog. Well, they did not give it up so much as contract it out to a
> company that put profit ahead of product and they essentially stopped doing it
> on the governments behalf.
I was about to not respond, but -- I have this thing about errors of
fact: I want to see them corrected. So yes,
Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> The “secure communications” paradigm of course spans a whole spectrum
>> from “I don’t give a ” to “I’ll do anything to protect my
>> communications, including giving away my first born”. I suspect the
>> “average Joe user” in 2014 is slightly above the former, but wa
On Mon, April 14, 2014 16:47, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> how exactly could a private contractor have that level
>> of security clearance, anyway?
>
> The government had a seat that needed filling, they couldn't get the
> seat filled at the paycheck they're legally allowed to offer to a
> direct em
On 4/14/2014 3:57 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 04/14/2014 11:42 AM, Christopher J. Walters wrote:
I do NOT believe that this is off topic for this list
Then can we get a ruling from the list owners/moderators please?
We already have one from Werner Koch. However, that doesn't matter, it IS
of
how exactly could a private contractor have that level
of security clearance, anyway?
The government had a seat that needed filling, they couldn't get the
seat filled at the paycheck they're legally allowed to offer to a
direct employee, so they hired a private contractor to fill the role.
On 14/04/14 21:27, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> Given the bug was introduced in March of 2012, that would mean the bug would
> have had to been discovered, an exploit tested, a product weaponized
In /this specific instance/, I believe these three can indeed be the product of,
well, mere hours.
I do
As the Great One, Doug Barton stated (paraphrasing), this topic is
totally off-topic for this list, and I have violated the owners'
wishes by posting on it, and, of course I should have known this,
and not even tried to post on this topic on this list.
There have been several posts on this
On 04/14/2014 11:42 AM, Christopher J. Walters wrote:
I do NOT believe that this is off topic for this list
Then can we get a ruling from the list owners/moderators please?
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mai
On 4/14/2014 3:27 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
Given the bug was introduced in March of 2012, that would mean the bug would
have had to been discovered, an exploit tested, a product weaponized, a product
distributed to end-users, and deployed by end-users against targets, all in
under a month fro
list), some more reports on it, that you may have not seen. These
reports suggest the the NSA knew about and exploited the bug for "at
least" two years, and may have even worked to stop it from being
reported and fixed.
Given the bug was introduced in March of 2012, that would mean the bug
On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 20:42, cwal...@comcast.net said:
> Are you the list owner? Did you put a "subject line block" on this
> list? If so, you should have said so, if not, then the list owner
There are only a few anti-spam measures on all gnupg.org lists and they
have been there for years. Speci
On 4/14/2014 2:43 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
.snip.
Heartbleed! Heartbleed! Heartbleed!
Nope, no Great Old Ones have risen from the depths and begun to expose humanity
to unimaginable horrors. Maybe if I try again with the word "Hastur"... [*]
Heartbleed was bad, yes. However, it's hard f
I tried to post a message on that certain bug to this list
yesterday, and it has never shown up. I had two sources that
suggested that said bug is far more severe than most people think.
So this message is a test.
Heartbleed! Heartbleed! Heartbleed!
Nope, no Great Old Ones have risen f
On 4/14/2014 2:35 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
Aside from the obvious fact that this is off-topic for this list, as has been
pointed out several times already, wouldn't the existence of a subject line
block give you a pretty good hint about the list owner's intentions?
Doug
Are you the list owner?
Aside from the obvious fact that this is off-topic for this list, as has
been pointed out several times already, wouldn't the existence of a
subject line block give you a pretty good hint about the list owner's
intentions?
Doug
___
Gnupg-users maili
The discussion on the Heatbleed bug has apparently stopped here, and just about
everywhere else, but I found (courtesy of another mailing list), some more
reports on it, that you may have not seen. These reports suggest the the NSA
knew about and exploited the bug for "at least" two years, and
On 4/14/2014 11:56 AM, Christopher J. Walters wrote:
I tried to post a message on that certain bug to this list yesterday, and it
has never shown up. I had two sources that suggested that said bug is far more
severe than most people think. So this message is a test.
So, is there a keyword blo
I tried to post a message on that certain bug to this list yesterday, and it
has never shown up. I had two sources that suggested that said bug is far more
severe than most people think. So this message is a test.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-
On Sun, 13 Apr 2014 22:38, rdohm...@gmail.com said:
> Hi, why has ElGamal no padding in gcryt ?
Please me more verbose. See RFC-4880 on how Elgamal is used in OpenPGP.
Salam-Shalom,
Werner
--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
___
20 matches
Mail list logo
