On Mon, Sep 10, 2012, at 19:45, ved...@nym.hush.com wrote:
> Either people are on their own computers, which they trust, and
> which they can cleanse the memory and reboot, or they are on
> untrusted computers, where memory is the least of their problems.
>
> In any event, it is simply possible
On Sun, Sep 9, 2012, at 23:02, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 09/09/12 22:04, antispa...@sent.at wrote:
> > It's sad to see that Pretty Good Privacy is just about pretty good and
> > nothing more. People don't seem to care beyond playing 007.
>
> Are you talking about how an encryption/signing tool is
On Sun, Sep 9, 2012, at 21:16, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 09/09/12 21:06, Milo wrote:
> > I'm not sure what you are trying to say/prove by polemics with things I
> > didn't wrote. I won't speculate about your faith in editors, your threat
> > model, and probably there is no real point for you to spe
Could you recommend a safe text editor, in the sense it does protect
the edited contents in memory, but, most important, on the disk (temp
files and such). Having functions to interact with gnupg would be even
better.
The point is to edit a text and have it all encrypted on disk. I'd like
one that
Thank you Faramir!
I was so afraid nobody would feed the troll and the archives would split
the OP and the answer because of the passing month.
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012, at 04:36, Faramir wrote:
> El 29-08-2012 5:28, antispa...@sent.at escribió:
> > I'm (for some of you) your worst nightmare. Somebod
I felt offended by my own email: What is stopping PKI from growing. So
I come with a question: some security apps like TrueCrypt and KeePass
allow the user to use a keyfile instead of a password.
Now, given a file filled with values 0 to 255 as random as they
possibly can get, a keyfile is the ide
Hello List!
I'm (for some of you) your worst nightmare. Somebody who does not master
the fine arts of cryptography, yet has an oppinion about cryptography. I
might say I enjoy reading the thread on PKI, but I wasn't able to read
it all.
Please understand this is not a flame against Landon, but ra
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012, at 03:23, Faramir wrote:
> El 22-07-2012 19:39, antispa...@sent.at escribió:
> > On Sun, Jul 22, 2012, at 16:25, Doug Barton wrote:
> ...
> >> Your private key is encrypted, right? Use a strong password for
> >> that and you're in fine shape.
> >
> > Yes, security through o
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012, at 16:25, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> A different method I'd like to throw in for consideration is using a very
> strong
> random password generated by KeePass as the password to unlock your
> OpenPGP
> private key.
Yes, that sounds a lot better than what I had in mind. It's also
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012, at 21:16, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> The real concern here isn't making the overall system weaker: it's
> fooling yourself into thinking you've made the system stronger, when in
> reality you probably haven't.
I don't want to make it really stronger. Just less usable for the
e
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012, at 16:52, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> On 7/22/2012 12:12 PM, Faramir wrote:
> > If your secret key is password protected, placing it inside a keepass
> > file would add a second (maybe unneeded) layer of protection, and you
> > can chose a different encryption algorithm than Gnu
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012, at 16:25, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 07/22/2012 14:51, antispa...@sent.at wrote:
> > Having a few private files opened with the key that resides on the same
> > hard drive unit, which I know it's a no–no.
>
> Your private key is encrypted, right? Use a strong password for that a
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012, at 18:46, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 07/21/2012 16:26, antispa...@sent.at wrote:
> > Hmm… that's an excellent question. I never formulated it this way. I
> > guess computer theft. The other possible scenarios are far less
> > probable.
>
> Still doesn't answer the question. :) W
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012, at 14:12, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 07/20/2012 08:51, antispa...@sent.at wrote:
> > I don't know much about security and cryptography. So what do you think
> > about this combination? Is it any safer or is just a waste of time with
> > the conversion to ASCII and back?
>
> We c
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012, at 17:29, MFPA wrote:
> > I don't know much about security and cryptography. So
> > what do you think about this combination? Is it any
> > safer or is just a waste of time with the conversion to
> > ASCII and back?
>
> What combination? Give people a clue!
My fault. Keepas
I don't know much about security and cryptography. So what do you
think about this combination? Is it any safer or is just a waste
of time with the conversion to ASCII and back?
Cheers
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg
16 matches
Mail list logo
