Hi,
I want to add many subkeys under a primary key,
now I can use `gpg --edit-key ` and
type addkey command blah blah... to do it manually,
then repeat these steps again and again,
until enough subkeys for current key I have.
But before it,
I use batch mode to auto-create (unattended) new primary
> Many write-ups of atomic/sub-atomic level phenomena seem to me to
> involve considerable deviations from our commonsense notions of
> reality. (-;
Nonsense. What, you don't find quantum mechanics to be common-sense and
wholly intuitive? ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signatu
On 07.07.2014 23:49, eMyListsDDg wrote:
> in practice, do users of gnupg find that having multiple email account id's
> added to one key/pair using that key/pair to sign and/or encrypt emails &
> files more efficient to manage?
>
> curious how other uses in this situation manage their gnupg?
I'm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Monday 7 July 2014 at 11:11:36 PM, in
, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> It's been done a few times but without results, which
> is unsurprising: on an atomic level gravity is
> ridiculously weak. It's still being researched. Smart
> money is th
> Hi everyone. I just signed up to this list and thought to introduce
> myself.
Welcome to the community! We're a pretty friendly bunch here. Hasn't
been any blood drawn in quite a while, honestly. :)
With respect to delays in the keyserver network, the major address that
people tend to use (
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I was recently setting up my new keys along with some other people,
and I discovered that as soon as one of my cohorts sent their keys and
recieved confirmation, I could retrieve the keys and they showed up.
When I sent stuff to the key servers, howeve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi everyone. I just signed up to this list and thought to introduce
myself. I've been aware of gpg for a long time, but seldom have I had
occasion to actually use it. Well, now I do, so I'm all signed up and
introducing myself. As you can probably
On 7/7/2014 5:52 PM, Leo Gaspard wrote:
> Wasn't there an experiment running, one or two years ago, about
> trying to make anti-electrons anti-gravitate? I don't remember of
> having read any result, though...
It's been done a few times but without results, which is unsurprising:
on an atomic leve
On Sun, Jul 06, 2014 at 12:21:13PM -0400, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> On 7/6/2014 3:36 AM, The Fuzzy Whirlpool Thunderstorm wrote:
> > Using GPG encryption is still good, although it's vulnerable to
> > quantum cryptodecryption.
>
> In point of fact, we don't know this.
>
> Theoretically, science-f
in practice, do users of gnupg find that having multiple email account id's
added to one key/pair using that key/pair to sign and/or encrypt emails & files
more efficient to manage?
i have mulitple email accounts and in the past had generated a key/pair for
each, each with its own unique passph
On 07-07-2014 10:09, The Fuzzy Whirlpool Thunderstorm wrote:
> It depends on how important the data is. Of course, if the data is so
> important, when the expiration time comes, all the data encrypted with
> the old key need to be decrypted and encrypted with the new generated
> key.
However, if
On July 6, 2014 4:40:13 PM PDT, MFPA <2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-gro...@riseup.net>
wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA512
>
>Hi
>
>
>On Sunday 6 July 2014 at 3:25:57 PM, in
>, Johan Wevers wrote:
>
>
>
>> Since I don't know when I will consider a key
>> compromised or weak, I don't w
> it is not (afaik) possible to bind that detached signature to the plaintext
> and have it encrypted as one process. I would need to be zipped together or
> otherwise connected first.
=
I haven't tried this, so i don't know how it would work,
but you might try to CAT and pipe to gpg encryp
Hi.
I once encountered the following situation.
One of my contacts did send his/her private key on the public key server.
Claiming that this was his/her public key. Funnily enough I did import that key
and did not get aware it was a secret key. And as far as I remember it worked
to decrypt her
On 7/7/2014 at 10:42 AM, "Walter Lange" wrote:
>I would like to encrypt a signed (with ASCII armor) text. It
>should take
>two steps, because I want to use two different machines, a local
>one to
>sign and a remote machine which encrypts. The result should be the
>same
>as the encrypted and si
Hi mailing list!
I would like to encrypt a signed (with ASCII armor) text. It should take
two steps, because I want to use two different machines, a local one to
sign and a remote machine which encrypts. The result should be the same
as the encrypted and signed one in one step. Is that possible?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 07/07/2014 04:01 PM, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> On Thursday 03 July 2014 at 12:05:07, Werner Koch wrote:
>> I just released the fifth *beta version* of GnuPG 2.1. It has
>> been released to give you the opportunity to check out new
>> features and
On Thursday 03 July 2014 at 12:05:07, Werner Koch wrote:
> I just released the fifth *beta version* of GnuPG 2.1. It has been
> released to give you the opportunity to check out new features and
> to fix the bugs in the last beta.
Congratulations on the new beta!
About th ECC support in GnuPG 2.
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2014 15:26:36 +0200
From: The Fuzzy Whirlpool Thunderstorm
To: Peter Lebbing ;, gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Subject: Re: GPG's vulnerability to quantum cryptography
Message-ID: <20140707132636.ga64...@blinkenshell.org>
References:
<20140706073605.ga65...@blinkenshell.org>
<53b95c75.
On 06/07/14 16:25, Johan Wevers wrote:
> I don't see the relation between these two.
I agree.
This conversation is still a mystery to me.
"The Fuzzy Whirlpool Thunderstorm", it seems to me you advocate revoking
an encryption key, or letting it expire, when you suspect the key could
be cracked by
On Sun, Jul 06, 2014 at 07:35:05PM +0200, gnupg-users-requ...@gnupg.org wrote:
> On 06-07-2014 9:36, The Fuzzy Whirlpool Thunderstorm wrote:
>
> > Using GPG encryption is still good, although it's vulnerable to quantum
> > cryptodecryption.
> > It's a good idea to set an expiration for each of yo
Hello Christian
>I bought a cyberJack go [1] to use it with my openPGP smart card for
>authentification. Since the firmware of that device is upgradeable and
>is capable of saving atleast 2 GB of data, how can I be sure it is not a
>security threat by saving sensitive data?
May be done an encrypt
On Sun, Jul 06, 2014 at 12:53:26PM +0100, MFPA wrote:
> At the same time, would you advocate decrypting all your encrypted
> files and encrypting them to the new key? Or were you just referring
> to encrypted communications?
It depends on how important the data is. Of course, if the data is so
imp
23 matches
Mail list logo
