On Sun, 30 Apr 2023 13:58, Andrew Gallagher said:
> The danger of an “ignore ADK” option is that it gives a false sense of
And not to forget the other important use case: Add an ADK for your own
second device so that you are able to decrypt also on that device -
without the need to keep the pimar
On Mon, 1 May 2023 13:10, Todd Zullinger said:
> Sorry it interrupted your weekend. Thanks for the new
Actually it was Friday evening and I left the office a bit earlier than
usual.
Salam-Shalom,
Werner
--
The pioneers of a warless world are the youth that
refuse military service.
Michael Richardson wrote:
Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
>> I'm unclear if this is a new feature (I think so), and if so what
happens if
>> the sender hasn't upgraded yet?
>>
> My understanding: ADKs are new and do not work without support on the
> sender's side. The ADK is a req
Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
>> I'm unclear if this is a new feature (I think so), and if so what
happens if
>> the sender hasn't upgraded yet?
>>
> My understanding: ADKs are new and do not work without support on the
> sender's side. The ADK is a request to also encrypt any me
Werner Koch via Gnupg-users wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 11:21, Todd Zullinger said:
>
>> It seems neither of these files have not made it to the
>> server yet:
>
> Sorry for that. I have used a new build machine and obviously forgot
> one of the last steps. Most of the release process is script
On 1 May 2023, at 12:40, Ineiev via Gnupg-users wrote:
> now, I generate a key
> for y...@guan.edu locally and add 0123456789ABCDEF as an ADK (BTW,
> will GnuPG complain if the only encryption-capable subkey is ADK?
Or you could just use an alias…?
A
_
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 10:52:10PM -0500, Jacob Bachmeyer via Gnupg-users wrote:
>
> That is an almost prototypical example. In that case, the "archive" key
> would actually be the main subkey, and the list recipients' personal keys
> would be attached as ADKs.
>
> Another example: suppose I ha
