On 19.07.15 20:22, Crissy Lynn wrote:
> Please remove me from this mailing list.
Please follow the link at the bottom of each list email and follow
instructions.
--
Ville
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing l
On 18.07.15 17:21, Philip Neukom wrote:
> I put "secure" in quotes as they talk about a "proprietary" encryption
> algorithm. As soon as I read "proprietary", I have to roll my eyes as I
> don't necessarily trust encryption if it isn't open for everyone to verify.
Pretty much.
> Is this similar
On 18.07.15 07:38, NIIBE Yutaka wrote:
> On 07/18/2015 03:04 AM, Ville Määttä wrote:
>> $make -f build-aux/speedo.mk native INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr/local/gnupg
>> CC=/usr/local/bin/gcc-5 CXX=/usr/local/bin/g++-5
> [...]
>> Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
>>
I'm getting a failure at speedo.mk build for 2.1.6 on OS X 10.10.4
Yosemite. I'm using a forced brewed GCC 5.2, that is:
$make -f build-aux/speedo.mk native INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr/local/gnupg
CC=/usr/local/bin/gcc-5 CXX=/usr/local/bin/g++-5
It's failing at gpg-agent. Just the short snippet below. I
On 27.04.15 12:43, MFPA wrote:
>> Right now, they're rolling out a payment system here in
>> > The Netherlands where you only need to tap your bank
>> > card to the payment terminal to do small payments.
>> > That's all that is needed.
> We have that in the UK already. Payments up to, I think, GBP
On 25.03.15 22:32, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 3/25/15 1:20 PM, Ville Määttä wrote:
>> On 25.03.15 21:41, Doug Barton wrote:
>>> While this is strictly anecdotal evidence I would argue that it's a good
>>> indication that we may not be ready for PGP/MIME as the def
On 26.03.15 01:38, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
> On 25/03/15 23:56, Ville Määttä wrote:
>> > On 26.03.15 00:14, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
>>> >> So it's not mailman that's not smart enough, but the mail clients
>>> >> the other recipients are using. Mail
On 26.03.15 18:17, Brian Minton wrote:
> I think gmail is the single most popular email client, with 500 million
>
> users.
There are about 7,3 billion people out there that don't have a clue what
OpenPGP is.
> I think that until there is a way to verify pgp signatures from
>
> within gmail, pg
On 26.03.15 00:14, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> So it's not mailman that's not smart enough, but the mail clients the other
> recipients are using. Mail clients showing a "signature.asc" attachment
> probably do not understand PGP/MIME (which isn't that unusual because only a
> handful mail clients sup
On 25.03.15 21:42, Doug Barton wrote:
>
> Doug
>
> --
> I am conducting an experiment in the efficacy of PGP/MIME signatures.
> This message should be signed. If it is not, or the signature does not
> validate, please let me know how you received this message (direct, or
> to a list) and the mai
On 25.03.15 21:41, Doug Barton wrote:
> While this is strictly anecdotal evidence I would argue that it's a good
> indication that we may not be ready for PGP/MIME as the default.
I think that fail, a signature.asc attachment, is still a "cleaner fail"
than a non-PGP receiver getting a breakdown f
On 20.03.15 20:47, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Fri 2015-03-20 13:43:27 -0400, Bob (Robert) Cavanaugh wrote:
>> > One thought to add to the mix: Phishng attacks by having
>> > unknowledgable users "click on this link" are pretty
>> > successful. Doesn't this proposal open a new threat vector?
Y
On 13.03.15 15:27, Werner Koch wrote:
> The more expensive CAs are only selling you a fashionable background
> color for your the client's address bar.
Essentially, that's it :).
There are however clearly defined hard requirements to the Extended
Validation, aka "green bar" level. That is, more i
On 13.03.15 15:04, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 05:55:53AM -0300, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
>> > On 2015-03-13 08:21, Werner Koch wrote:
>>> > > On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 00:21, h...@barrera.io said:
>>> > >
> > > No need for a wildcard one. Just get one free certificate for each
On 12.03.15 20:52, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> My point was that you wrote multiple paragraphs worth of stories on
>> > two emails from which I really got the impression that people should
>> > just not bother.
> In response to someone who was thinking that storing keys on your hard
> drive was cat
On 12.03.15 19:21, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> If you think I'm portraying them as "completely unusable," then I think
> you didn't bother to read my message very closely.
I read both of your messages quite closely. Had you merely pointed out
the downsides of having to carry a card, a reader etc. I
> But for just as many users, smart cards are inconvenient and overkill.
> Frankly, they have awful usability, just terrible.
…
> finding the smart card is
> easy -- it's in my wallet -- but finding the smart card *reader* is the
> sort of thing that leads me to crazed conspiracy theories.
That's
On 10.03.15 04:41, NIIBE Yutaka wrote:
>> So this is not a question about portable flash drives vs. smartcards per
>> > se. I _think_ I understand those risks and trade-offs but if there is
>> > something I'm missing then, of course, I'd like to know.
> I had an experience that one of my family mem
On 04.03.15 12:48, Werner Koch wrote:
>> that doesn't tell you about proprietary projects that have chosen not to
>> > use GPGME. I've had clients refuse to use GPGME because of the
>> > licensing, even under the LGPLv2.1. (Foolish, I know.) Other times
> And I have had several hints that it was
On 04.03.15 18:21, Bjarni Runar Einarsson wrote:
> GPGME proponents will be frustrated to hear that this knowledge actually
> makes me feel much better about Mailpile's decision to wrap gpg
> directly: it means I've removed two layers of abstraction between my
> code and gpg! Win! Although supposed
On 04.03.15 01:55, Hans of Guardian wrote:
> In Android, you can't really have shared libraries. Apps share functionality
> at a higher level (aka Activities and Services).
Qt applications can share Qt libraries [1] with an external dependency
called Ministro [2].
[1]: http://doc.qt.io/qtcreato
On 03.03.15 14:54, Stephan Beck wrote:
> as your message hasn't reached the list inspite of being addressed to it
It did :).
--
Ville
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://list
On 21 Feb 2015, at 15:55, Xavier Maillard wrote:
>
> Hi Ville,
>
> Ville Määttä writes:
>
>> I happen to use Mail so for a long time I’ve been using the GPGMail
>> plugin with a brewed[2] upstream GnuPG. I.e. *just one of the
>> things in the GPG Suite*. I’
On 20.02.15 15:27, NdK wrote:
>>> 5 - possibility to export private keys to user-certified devices
>> > That pretty much defeats the point of using a smart card in the first
>> > place.
> That's not "uncontrolled export", and in fact…
> …(snip)…
> while importing a key (so that you "can't" alter -
On 20.02.15 16:44, Lukas Pitschl wrote:
> Pinentry-mac is one project we’ve „revived“ and thus only added stuff on top
> of the old code instead of refactoring it.
> We’ve been planning to do that for a long time now though, so we’ll
> definitely look into that and check out how other UIs do it,
On 20.02.15 11:36, Lukas Pitschl wrote:
>> No pinentry, nothing just happens. /Will need to
>> > troubleshoot this further on 2.1.2 to try to find out more./
> We’ve noticed that the hang occurs in pcsc_get_status_change. Instead of
> receiving a timeout, it simply hangs forever, due to a bug in Y
On 20.02.15 11:29, Lukas Pitschl wrote:
> It would be great if there’s an outline of the changes which might break
> backwards compatibility (if any).
From usage point of view: https://gnupg.org/faq/whats-new-in-2.1.html
>> The things that would require a little changing are the launchd
>> templ
On 20.02.15 12:42, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
> Might I suggest that you start with pinentry?
Agreed.
> It would be really helpful if you could instead create a new subdirectory
> cocoa and do it like the other pinentries.
Oh yes, definitely agreed. Integrate the necessary changes to the
upstrea
On 19.02.15 21:18, Ville Määttä wrote:
> Surely someone from the KDE / larger community
> using pinentry-qt4 has been working on a QT 5 version of pinentry?
Ok, found it :). Issue #1806 [1].
[1]: https://bugs.g10code.com/gnupg/issue1806
--
Ville
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP d
On 18.02.15 13:05, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
>> > Upstream still does have the issue which now seems to have been fixed in
>> > the fork but in a binary removed from upstream…
> I really can not confirm this. I am running vanilla GnuPG 2.1.2 (built from
> source) on Yosemite (10.10.2 to be exact)
On 18.02.15 07:21, Werner Koch wrote:
>> wrappers or fixes upstream. Case in point: Has the fix for gpg-agent /
>> > scdaemon hang been discussed upstream at all [4], [5]? In MacGPG there
>> > is still ../libexec/gnupg-pcsc-wrapper which has been modified in
>> > commit f4c3e1bb to fix the issues o
On 18.02.15 07:21, Werner Koch wrote:
>> > command line tools. *I think there is no more reason to develop
>> > MacGPG*, i.e. a port, anymore. Let the port die.
> Can you briefly explain how Patrick's new installer [1] is related to that?
> Would it be an option to use that as the core for gpgtools
On 17.02.15 23:32, Lukas Pitschl wrote:
> The best way to reach us is either our support platform at
> https://gpgtools.tenderapp.com or t...@gpgtools.org.
Ok, that link explains the certificate and it makes more sense. I can
see you've already changed at least the first link to the support site
> On 18 Feb 2015, at 19:07, Johan Wevers wrote:
>
> Admit it, IPv6 has
> failed. It may get some uses, but the widespread adaptation of carrier
> NAT has made it largely obsolete.
Utter, complete, nonsense.
--
Ville
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnu
> On 18 Feb 2015, at 21:13, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>
> I'm not convinced that it's gnupg's job to compensate for
> unreasonably-configured IPv6 stacks that think they have a route but
> actually don’t.
I agree. I think the actual problem should be addressed at the networking level
instead o
> On 17 Feb 2015, at 21:16, Juergen Fenn wrote:
>
> as you've pointed
> out, the GPGTools have decided to go all commercial including, I
> didn't realise this before, a closed code repository so that no one
> can study the code? Is this true? I can't believe it.
That’s not quite true. They must
> On 17 Feb 2015, at 21:03, Sandeep Murthy wrote:
>
> As a user, not a developer on MacGPG, the issues previously
> raised here about the remote execution of scripts etc. may be
> questionable, but they do not directly affect my use of the software,
> which is nothing but a front end for GnuPG.
> On 17 Feb 2015, at 18:31, Martin Paljak wrote:
>
> Not sure about overall GnuPG affection with Apple or other closed
> source software, but the PC/SC layer in Yosemite is broken (again):
>
> http://ludovicrousseau.blogspot.fr/2014/12/os-x-yosemite-and-smart-cards-known-bugs.html
Yeah, Apple h
I’ve had some concerns about GPGTools for months now. For some time I've
disliked the way the project is being run, the communication of what they are
planning and the way they have been doing their development for example. Months
went by when their Yosemite betas were not available in source at
> On 13 Feb 2015, at 08:25, Christopher W. Richardson
> wrote:
>
> FWIW, Mac Mail marked this message as spam. Not sure if it universally does
> that for all inline sigs, but ... FYI.
>
> Chris
Fortunately it certainly does not.
--
Ville
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with Open
UX-designer-aproach to car design:
"We need to remove break and clutch pedals from cars because our user studies
say that a 3 pedal interface for driving an automobile is just way too
difficult."
I say those who can’t be arsed to learn how, do not deserve a driver’s license.
You let a child fa
No worries on my part.
> it seems to install software in versioned directories.
Exactly, under /usr/local… and without messing with the system installed
binaries or libraries. Some things, like openssl libraries, it will not link
automatically to avoid some issues with system provided libraries
Hi,
That’s somehow just the result of running ./configure. Running a fresh (fresh
untarred source, no speedo runs) configure reported this for me:
…
configure: checking for libraries
checking for gpg-error-config... /usr/local/bin/gpg-error-config
checking for GPG Error - version >= 1.15... yes
Yeah, OS X. I’m sorry, I’m sure this is drowning to all the discussion on this
thread, I didn’t think too much about the subject. I was replying to Nicholas’
reported issues with building on OS X. My aim was to expand on Nicholas’ report
with the info that it’s failing with that error yes, but b
und for option
'-L/usr/local/Cellar/libgpg-error/1.13/lib'
make[4]: *** [all] Error 2
make[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
make[1]: ***
[/Users/vmaatta/Downloads/gnupg-2.1.0/PLAY/stamps/stamp-gnupg-02-make] Error 2
make: *** [native] Error 2
On 6 Nov 2014, at 16:
Hi,
I can’t use speedo.mk as I get "GnuPG has already been build[sic] in-source”.
I’m not going to replace 2.0 at this time so I won’t remove it. With just
‘make’ I get an error on linking libgpg-error. I happen to have versions 0.16
and 0.17 but not 0.13 under the referenced path.
[shell quot
Hi John,
You could try the following environment variable:
export PINENTRY_USER_DATA="USE_CURSES=1”
If that’s no good maybe something in following thread helps:
http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2009-June/036583.html
--
Ville
On 16 Oct 2014, at 23:02, John Lane wrote:
> Hello, I
I bought my SCR3500 and SCR335 V2 from Identive / Chipdrive [1]. I had a
problem adding VAT number to the order myself but at least they ship (and
kindly handled fixing the bill afterwards). Though, they only seem to have an
SCT3511 there, not a 3512.
[1] http://www.chipdrive.de
--
Ville
://brew.sh
[2] https://www.macports.org
[3] https://gpgtools.org
[4] http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2014-August/050677.html
--
Ville Määttä
On 01 Sep 2014, at 21:33, Travis Millburn wrote:
> I’m running into problems compiling GnuPG on my mac running OS X 10.9.4.
signature.
You'll need to import the other person’s public key as that is what you are
encrypting to.
If the other person has uploaded their key to a key server you should be able
to find it there:
gpg --search-key recipi...@example.com
If you already know, preferably the long form, key ID you can just u
I’d actually like to know why the pinentry / pinentry-curses that come from
homebrew don’t seem to work at all. I am now using pinentry-mac but I wouldn’t
mind getting the normal pinentry working. All I get is "Agent admitted failure
to sign using the key.” without any PIN queries. I can see the
Maybe a little off topic, but then again we are talking about keeping gnupg up
to date.
TL;DR: I think either MacPorts or Homebrew can be used and one or the other is
quite necessary. I do most of my work on the command line / Vim, etc. and using
either is just as convenient as apt-get / yum et
GENT_INFO
export SSH_AUTH_SOCK
export SSH_AGENT_PID
fi
[4] END
--
Ville
On 19 Aug 2014, at 22:33, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 8/19/14 11:17 AM, Ville Määttä wrote:
>> 1. The package and gnupg2 version used has not been updated since October
>> 2013 (2013.10.22). If I’m not co
Yeah. Ok. Assuming the Mac guys / fork referred to here are GPGTools / MacGPG2
I can see a couple bigger issues there than just patching in support for bigger
keys.
1. The package and gnupg2 version used has not been updated since October 2013
(2013.10.22). If I’m not completely mistaken the ve
Quite. Who are the "Mac guys" and what did they fork?
--
Ville
> On 19.8.2014, at 12.14, Nicholas Cole wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Richard Outerbridge
>> wrote:
>> Still waiting for my email address, yet my blackphone is already in
>> my hands. Keep up the good work.
>>
>>
I'm using the FSFE card [1] with SCR3500 [2]. Ok yeah sure, that’s a fellowship
card but I actually also wanted to point out the SCR3500 which is a nice
similar form factor option for a reader.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jbaxi8ulfdz5585/fsfe_with_scr3500.jpg
[1] http://fsfe.org/fellowship/card.h
Hi… any other problems with GPG Tools version?
I was using the brew -installed gpg first, had some issues with getting it to
recognise OpenPGP card, I switched to GPG Tools version and it’s been ok. Now
I’m having trouble getting non-card based keys to work with SSH through
gpg-agent. I.e. they
So, when was the last time you were offered a parachute on flight? :), sorry I
just had to.
I have to say I agree with Doug on StartSSL, I think they’re doing a more of a
service to the community by offering affordable certs and the revocation fee is
understandable. And reasonable. And sometime
-the-gpgme-library-from-net
--
Ville Määttä
On 25 Apr 2014, at 01:07, Charles Spitzer wrote:
> Greetings
>
> Is there a GnuPGP project anywhere that does PGP encryption that is usable in
> a C# application? I know I can execute commands at a command line to do this,
> but tha
59 matches
Mail list logo
