ys
your.em...@example.org ... and this doesn't work.
Should I be concerned? Do I need to change something for the latter
example to work? Or is that deprecated now and your example is the
valid one?
Regards
Philip
On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 at 11:39, Werner Koch wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
>
There wasn't a configuration file in place for gpg so I created one
with just this entry:
auto-key-locate pka
Should there be other entries in that file? Is that why I'm getting
the "No name error"?
Thank you.
Regards
Philip
___
Gn
hances that
the secret is lost, or to increase the number of parties that must cooperate
to reveal the secret."
hhh
Philip
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
plaintext file without asking for
> a passphrase.
It would seem that the command '-d' is missing.
gpg -d testfile.gpg
works for me. And requests the password before decrypting.
Philip
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On 14/09/17 07:26, NIIBE Yutaka wrote:
> Philip Jackson wrote:
>> I have the log file which I attach.
>>
>> It shows a number of reports of the same error (lines 89,91,97,99,101)
>> ERR 83886254 Unknown option , before it asks me for the pin
>> (line 111). It
ent established
gpg: using subkey 0x79D467BFF5DF6C91 instead of primary key
0x26BD500A23543A63
# off=271 ctb=d2 tag=18 hlen=2 plen=0 partial new-ctb
:encrypted data packet:
length: unknown
mdc_method: 2
gpg: using subkey 0x79D467BFF5DF6C91 instead of primary key
0x26BD500A23543A63
gpg: encr
rough.
gpg2 -K does list my secret key -
Suggestions as to how to check and correct this situation would be
appreciated.
Philip
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
an us ((null) < 2.1.21)
[GNUPG:] WARNING server_version_mismatch 0 server 'scdaemon' is older than us
((null) < 2.1.21)
When building with SCDAEMON support, this warning disappears as expected.
With or without SCDAEMON support, gpg now properly exits 0 again.
Will there be a 2.1
ed
[GNUPG:] CARDCTRL 6
We don't build the FreeBSD port with SCDAEMON support. To verify, we built it
for one box with SCDAEMON support, but the error is still the same.
Is there anything else we can try?
Cheers,
Philip
___
Gnupg-users mailing li
On 18/02/17 16:15, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> O Come, All Ye Hackful! Adeste Fiddle-es[2]!
Yea !
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gn
that the command was not recognised.
After consulting man gpg2, I tried the following and this worked.
gpg2 --import --import-options keep-ownertrust
~/path-to-my-key/mykey.sec.asc
Thanks,
Philip
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
although verify on its own causes me a problem but I
shouldn't think that is connected with the smartcard.
Thanks.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
;ll have to dig in the archives and see if I can find records
of how I got it working back in 2014.
Philip
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
cess of moving to a new installation wrong.
So I am in need of a precise process description to start again and do
it correctly.
Philip
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
n the file decrypt command but of course
I have to enter the old full passphrase rather than the six digit pin of
the smartcard.
Philip
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
g and "gpg2 -o output_file -d
input_file.gpg" fail with the same message :
gpg: public key is 0x79D467BFF5DF6C91
gpg: using subkey 0x79D467BFF5DF6C91 instead of primary key
0x26BD500A23543A63
gpg: using subkey 0x79D467BFF5DF6C91 instead of primary key
0x26BD500A23543A63
gpg: encrypted with
ansceive failed: (0x1000a)
gpg: apdu_send_simple(0) failed: card I/O error
gpg: using subkey 0x79D467BFF5DF6C91 instead of primary key
0x26BD500A23543A63
gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 0x79D467BFF5DF6C91, created
2014-10-28
"Philip Jackson (Jan 2013 +) "
gpg: public key d
38.7.1esr-1-deb8u1) with touchpad. But I don't see the
problem you outline with the dropdown menus on gnupg.org (at least I
presume you are writing about gnupg.org ?).
I also use a wireless mouse but also no problem. And I'm cafeine
deficient so move very slowly at this time of day
using something like:
ldap://:password@server
I've tried:
keyserver ldap://server binddn="username" bindpw=password
Does anyone know the correct way to specify a username and password
for use with an LDAP keyserver, please?
Thanks.
Philip
___
keyserver-options bindpw=PASSWORD
which is what https://wiki.gnupg.org/LDAPKeyserver suggests, but the
software complains they are unrecognised; I suspect that gnupg 2.1
removed those but it isn't clear if they got replaced by something
else.
Thanks.
Philip
On 8 April 2016 at 12:19, Phil
ards to the ldd command, no, there is no linkage to libldap. I
have the libldap package installed, so do I need to do something to
get gnupg to link to it when I build it?
Regards
Philip
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://list
ogin.linaro.org
gpg: DBG: chan_4 <- OK
gpg: DBG: chan_4 -> KEYSERVER
gpg: DBG: chan_4 <- S KEYSERVER ldaps://uid=:@login.linaro.org
gpg: DBG: chan_4 <- OK
gpg: DBG: [not enabled in the source] keydb_new
gpg: DBG: [not enabled in the source] keydb_search enter
Regards
Philip
__
hould be doing something different to get more debugging info
out of dirmngr, please clarify. At the moment, the only information I
seem to be getting is:
gpg: DBG: chan_4 <- ERR 167772346 No keyserver available
Which doesn't really tell me much, and I cannot figure out where in
the so
ogin.linaro.org
gpg: DBG: chan_4 -> KS_PUT
gpg: DBG: chan_4 <- INQUIRE KEYBLOCK
gpg: DBG: chan_4 -> [ 44 20 99 01 25 30 44 04 56 fe 8f d2 01 08 00 c2
...(982 byte(s) skipped) ]
gpg: DBG: chan_4 -> [ 44 20 20 4f ad 28 53 1c 95 8a ae 0f 57 5f 35 fc
...(231 byte(s) skipped) ]
gpg:
ed key
gpg: Good signature from "MFPA" [unknown]
gpg: aka "2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-gro...@riseup.net
<2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-gro...@riseup.net>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "0x251BCCEB547B7194" [unknown]
gpg: WARNING: This key is not certifi
signature
UNTRUSTED BAD signature from 2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-gro...@riseup.net
<2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-gro...@riseup.net>"
Which is normal for an ECC key.
On my laptop, with Debian Jessie and gpg2.1.7, the signature verifies
ok. Again normal for 2.1.x
Philip
On 27/08/15 20:41, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> I, personally, don't think it's a big deal to drop mention of 1.4 except
> to talk about "it's for system administrators, not regular users".
> However, I'd really like to hear your feedback on this. Should we make
> this change? Yes or no?
Yes
sig
I have to roll my eyes as I
don't necessarily trust encryption if it isn't open for everyone to verify.
Has anyone here tried, verified or used this service?
Is this similar to what has been discussed as a potential use or service
by GnuPG? The service isn't seamless but perhaps woul
Thank you, Juan. I didn't see your helpful comments until I read the
digest this morning.
I appreciate everyone's help.
Philip.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
there is
there a way to move the trust rating from the old cert to the newly
created one other than ask those who signed to resign?
Thanks again,
Philip.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
pg --list-keys] with 1.4.19 and my keys are still there.
Why would v1.4.19 show my pub and sec keys but v2.1.5 wouldn't? I
presume this is something very basic but I'm stumped. I thought v1.x
and v2.x keys were interoperable??
Thanks in advance for any guidance,
Philip.
PS I'm on dig
what might have gone wrong and why adding the username gets the
same job done without any error messages ?
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
26 - so it might take a decade or so before gnupg2.1.xxx gets into the loop.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On 27/05/15 10:36, NIIBE Yutaka wrote:
> On 05/22/2015 02:27 AM, Philip Jackson wrote:
>> The key ID was 0x6e767393
>
> It seems for me that this key has subkey of ECC, and that's the cause
> of your trouble.
You're right - this key has an ECC subkey for signing.
)
Is it normal that gpg2 would not delete the key causing the problem ? If that
is so, then we'll need to keep a copy of gnupg 1.xxx for keyring management.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing li
: can't encode a 512 bit MD into a 608 bits frame
Aborted (core dumped)
134 philip@philip-desktop:~$
(134 being, I suppose, the error return)
This does not happen with gpg -k (ie using gnupg 1.4.16)
None of this is directly connected with attempting to sign a key (which I
haven't
ts frame
> Aborted (core dumped)
What causes this with gpg2 and not with gpg and what does it mean ? How should
I recover this situation ?
Thanks,
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnu
lable in its
repository as well as gnupg1.1.16
You should easily be able to find 2.0.22 in 14.04.
In a few weeks, you'll be able to get 15.04 (I suppose) and this could have
something later than 2.0.22.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP
acy-cards
>
Geographic distribution of the product seems to be limited to US only - at least
for your sponsors.
Philip
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
lunteers.
At present, the concensus of many threads is that encryption in general is just
too difficult for the average email user to use willingly and successfully. The
'average email user' just has his burden increased exponentially if he has to
build everything from source as well in or
ed your command string and then substituted my key identity for
yours. It worked ok. I tried the long id version like you used and also the
short id version. All worked ok.
So maybe it was just a keyserver glitch ?
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_
t running :
gpg-agent: "error while loading shared libraries: libnpth.so.0: cannot open
shared object file: No such file or directory"
libnpth.so.0 is certainly present in /usr/local/lib/.
Then I ran out of time - put the distro standard version back into service and
went
und' it would seem
that you saved the signature.asc file in some convenient place completely
removed from the email concerned and gpg couldn't make the connection.
In any case, the Beckus signed emails do check fine with good signature in my
thunderbird/enigmail client.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Hi Stephan,
On 12/02/15 22:46, Stephan Beck wrote:
> Hi, Philip,
>
> Am 11.02.2015 um 22:35 schrieb Philip Jackson:
>> On 11/02/15 21:16, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>>> On Wed 2015-02-11 14:02:49 -0500, Philip Jackson wrote:
>>>> On 11/02/15 14:59, Bria
ves you some
> well-deserved peace of mind regarding financially sustaining yourself and your
> family while continuing to work on GnuPG.
I'll second all that - great news !!
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On 11/02/15 21:16, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Wed 2015-02-11 14:02:49 -0500, Philip Jackson wrote:
>> On 11/02/15 14:59, Brian Minton wrote:
>>> In Debian, the experimental repo has gpg 2.1 with all dependencies. Follow
>>> the
>>> instructions at https:
y transparent but I suppose there must be a way
to determine if 2.0.22 is original or augmented ?
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
'm not there yet. No hurry, though - lots to learn.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
rs. So I don't mind trying available releases more up to date than the
distro makes available. I'm quite happy using enigmails's nightly builds.
Neither "Ubuntu Software Centre" nor "Synaptic Package Manager" indicate
availability of anything more modern than
?
Any and all advice will be gratefully accepted, thank you.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On 25/01/15 12:05, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> It seems Philip is confusing signed files and detached signatures, by the way:
>
>> > gpg --clearsign test1.txt gpg --clearsign -a test1.txt gpg --sign -a
>> > test1.txt
> The first two are exactly equivalent. Neither three pro
On 25/01/15 11:48, Damien Goutte-Gattat wrote:
> On 01/24/2015 08:05 PM, Philip Jackson wrote:
>> Using GPA 0.9.4 in linux. [...]
>> So it appears to be a bit hit and miss trying to use GPA to verify downloaded
>> .asc signatures.
>
> It looks like bug 1637 [1], whic
.16 which is the standard issue with my distro.
I tried gnupg 2.0.22 which was the standard offered by my distro but I couldn't
get their installation to work at all and I concluded that there must be
something wrong with it so I downloaded and compiled/installed myself 2.0.26
last summer (ish) and
On 24/01/15 20:25, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 24/01/15 20:05, Philip Jackson wrote:
>> Using GPA 0.9.4 in linux.
>>
>> I downloaded a file and its signature as a .asc from a website that I have
>> used many times. While looking at the spelling of the filename, I
>
ignature file had a similar
structure to the one made using the -ba command/option.
So it appears to be a bit hit and miss trying to use GPA to verify downloaded
.asc signatures.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users
never used (for various reasons).
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
step is to to move to gnupg 2.1 and that cannot co-exist with
2.0 versions.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
image at
72 dpi and it is really small on my screen but it only weighs 29kB.
I'll have a look at your suggestion, keybase.io.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
ever - it hardly permits you to prepare an image
before installing it to the key.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
too large. And it appears that not all software will display the image at the
same size.
Can anyone offer practical advice on the image parameters ?
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users
On 30/11/14 01:32, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> The keygrip is protocol-agnostic whereby the fingerprint would differ
> e.g. between OpenPGP and X.509. From [0] (note "[2]"):
>
> The keygrip is a unique identifier for a key pair, it is
> independent of any protocol, so that the same key can be u
don't remember
where I saw it), it seemed to me that a keygrip looked just like a fingerprint.
Could someone please explain the difference between a keygrip and a fingerprint
or point me to a relevant document ?
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital sign
urther info on these, try
these links :
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnupg2/+bug/1332864
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnupg2/+bug/1313879
My conclusion was that there must have been some issue with the gnupg2.0.22
package as prepared and released by ubuntu.
Philip
signat
oor language with little if any punctuation.
The name of the site recalls to me what was a popular expletive in the UK in or
around the 1970's : "Gordon Bennett!!"
Best forgotten.
Philip
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
acker know he has succeeded ? Does he have to pause between
each iteration to see if he has 'something good' ? And in the 10**38 key
attempts, what's the chance of having multiple apparently 'GOOD ONES' ?
Perhaps a double bluff is need
rest in it -- it seems
> disrespectful to Professor Johnson. :)
It would be very interesting to read and I add my name to the request.
(I remember well the late 80's when it was a major task getting agreement to
permit the relocation of a micro-VAX from an office in UK to
Peter, I've had time to read and try to get to grips with the contents of your
email. They've helped me make some progress :
On 22/10/14 11:19, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 21/10/14 00:36, Philip Jackson wrote:
>> I've followed, I believe, all the instructions in the gnupg
On 22/10/14 09:34, Jens Lechtenboerger wrote:
> On 2014-10-21, Philip Jackson wrote:
>
> Did you really verify that pcscd is not running? It can cause your
> error messages: https://blogs.fsfe.org/jens.lechtenboerger/?p=89
>
Your blog provides a lot of good stuff that I shall
Thank you for all this, Peter. It will take me a little while to digest and
check out.
Philip
On 22/10/14 11:19, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 21/10/14 00:36, Philip Jackson wrote:
>> I've followed, I believe, all the instructions in the gnupg.com smartcard
>> howto.
>>
On 22/10/14 09:34, Jens Lechtenboerger wrote:
> On 2014-10-21, Philip Jackson wrote:
>
>> It then treats the other protocol, PC/SC, but all it says is "TODO
>> - To use PC/SC make sure you disable CCID by passing the
>> --disable-ccid option to GnuPG."
>&
On 21/10/14 15:33, Tristan Santore wrote:
> On 21/10/14 14:10, Philip Jackson wrote:
>> On 21/10/14 12:59, Tristan Santore wrote:
>>> On 20/10/14 23:36, Philip Jackson wrote:
>> snip
>>
>>>> going under my UbuntuStudio 1404 linux. Using gnupg2
On 21/10/14 14:58, Pete Stephenson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Philip Jackson
> wrote:
>> On 21/10/14 09:25, Pete Stephenson wrote:
>>> What is the result of running the command:
>>>
>>> echo $GPG_AGENT_INFO
>>
>> echo $G
On 21/10/14 12:59, Tristan Santore wrote:
> On 20/10/14 23:36, Philip Jackson wrote:
snip
>> going under my UbuntuStudio 1404 linux. Using gnupg2 2.0.26.
>>
>> Trying to use the GnuPG driver to access CCID cards, "gpg2 --card-status"
>> yield
On 21/10/14 09:25, Pete Stephenson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 12:36 AM, Philip Jackson
> wrote:
> [snip]
>> This looks promising but I didn't take it any further because I want to get
>> it
>> going under my UbuntuStudio 1404 linux. Using gnupg2 2.0.26.
>
s should not be used in Ubuntu (unlike Debian) so I placed a copy of
gnupg-ccid.rules directly in that directory. But that didn't help.
lsusb shows that the SCM card reader is recognised and present but gpg doesn't
seem to be able to make contact.
I'd appreciate any ideas for what t
On 05/10/14 21:18, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 05/10/14 20:44, Philip Jackson wrote:
>>> desktop:~$ gpg2 -encrypt filename.txt
>
> Remember that a single dash introduces *short* options, so each letter is an
> option. I think this becomes:
>
> $ gpg2 --encrypt --dry-run
able as often as I want. If I use one of the correct options for
encrypt, the operation goes perfectly.
Why would gnupg pick an unwanted key for encryption ? That seems a potentially
dangerous thing to do even though there was a warning message.
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
you can use the first attachment to import into your
keyring. Then whether or not you trust his signature is your decision.
-Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
lly picked
up, for this reason they must be files and not symlinks to another
location as in the case in Debian."
so I tried replacing the link created during section 2.3.1 of the howto webpage
with a file. But the result is the same.
Have I misinterpreted the steps in 2.3.1 ?
-Philip
st file.
Looks like something to correct ?
-Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
m monitor shows me that gnome-keyring-daemon process is running (but I
don't think I'm actually doing anything with gnome keyrings) but it doesn't seem
to interfere with encrypting/decrypting or signing emails or using gpg2 to
verify signatures from the cli.
Philip
signature.asc
e-keyring-gpg.desktop
> 3. sudo apt-get install libdb-dev, libdb++-dev, libbz2-dev
> 4. Install Openldap-2.4.39 using ./configure, make depend, make, sudo
> make install
> 5. sudo apt-get install gtk+-2.0
> 6. Install pinentry, gnupg-2.1
What, please, is the reason for the st
, my problem is now resolved.
It is however, some years since I last encountered so much kerfuffle for such a
small purchase on the net.
I point out too, that scm-pc-card did reply promptly to my emails. A similar
query sent to a French company remains unanswered.
Regards,
Philip
signat
in
/var/www/osc/catalog/includes/application_top.php on line 318"
It looks like security is alive and doing well in Germany. I though we had
something going for us in Europe these days but apparently not.
Can anyone suggest a supplier in Europe who will sell outside his frontier
On 28/08/14 00:58, Steve Jones wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Aug 2014 12:56:11 +0200
> Philip Jackson wrote:
>
>> - the email address belongs to a person who does control the key and
>> he may or may not be the person named in the email address. I am
>> risking my secrets wit
tion of 2.0.26.
>
> As usual you need to install the development package for a library
> before you can use it. This includes the static version of the library
> (foo.a) and most important the header file.
I downloaded bzip2=1.0.6.tar.gz and now gnupg 2.0.26 seems to be working f
be elsewhere in the
file structure and I haven't yet found out how to make use of it for my
installation of 2.0.26.
For the moment, I'm more than happy that my first experience of compiling from
source code has worked.
Philip
0x23543A63.asc
Description
--version'
, the last line about compression shows that gpg2 does not have BZIP2.
I suppose gnupg-1.4.16 and the new 2.0.26 share the same gpg.conf so I could
remove BZIP2 from the gpg.conf file or perhaps better is to recompile 2.0.26
with BZIP2.
What do you recommend ?
Philip
0x2
On 24/08/14 18:23, Philip Jackson wrote:
> Wow, that's a pretty dumb mistake to make. I just assumed the latest version
> was at the bottom of the list on the ftp page. Sorry about that.
>
I've now got the four dependencies noted in the gnupg-2.0.26 README installed
under /u
On 24/08/14 17:29, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 08/24/2014 04:48 PM, Philip Jackson wrote:
>> I noted the dependencies and the order to install them. So I
>> downloaded the libgpg-error-1.9.tar.bz2 file and set about
>> extracting, configure, make, make install. Al
gcrypt?
What did I miss out ?
All advice welcome - thanks.
Philip
0x23543A63.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mail
y someone else. I have difficulty in seeing what
additional security is provided by a casual signature, given by a key-server or
by any other party.
Philip
0x23543A63.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
__
On 12/08/14 21:05, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 19:50, ps...@ubuntu.com said:
>> We used to use different keys for signing and encrypting ( DSA & El
>> Gammel ), but these days just seem to use a single RSA key by default.
>
> That is not the case. GnuPG creates an RSA signing key and
On 11/08/14 21:05, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> For some of us relatively new Ubuntu Linux users installing the
>> latest gnupg can be a challenge.
>
> The latest GnuPG is in the Ubuntu repositories, last I checked.
> Ubuntu's normally pretty good about keeping current.
I'm also a new Ubuntu user (
all the errors disappeared.
I'm still trying to pluck up courage to have another go at gnupg2 and then into
smart cards.
Philip
0x23543A63.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On 11/07/14 11:45, da...@gbenet.com wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> In what folder does gpg4win store it's gpa.conf and pubring.gpg files?
>
In Windows 7, 64bit, these files are in
/Users/your_user_name/AppData/Roaming/gnupg/
regards,
Philip
0x23543A63.asc
Description:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 20/06/14 11:41, Tristan Santore wrote:
> On 20/06/14 08:03, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
>> On Wednesday 18 June 2014 at 19:04:16, Philip Jackson wrote:
>>> It appears to me (in all my ignorance) that there is a problem
>>> c
Thank you Bernhard for your reply :
On 20/06/14 09:03, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 June 2014 at 19:04:16, Philip Jackson wrote:
>> It appears to me (in all my ignorance) that there is a problem connected
>> with gpg-agent and PINentry. The Synaptic Package Manag
I can't send signed or encrypted emails in Thunderbird.
I am using Thunderbird 24.5, enigmail 1.6, UbuntuStudio 14.04. Gnupg 1.4.16 was
already installed in the linux distribution and I installed gnupg2 v2.0.22. I
also installed Kleopatra and GPA because I am used to those gui's in Win7. I
impor
On 5.10.2013 15:31 , Charly Avital wrote:
> Philip Neukom wrote on 10/5/13 7:56 PM:
>>
>>
>> On 5.10.2013 9:53 , gnupg-users-requ...@gnupg.org wrote:
>>> From: Charly Avital To:
>>> Subject: Re: [Announce] [security fix] GnuPG
>>> 1.4.15 rele
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
