On Tue, 8 Jul 2014 09:56, bernh...@intevation.de said:
> Do you also know the status of CMS (x.509) for S/MIME?
May work but likely needs a bit of testing and code fiddling. I have
lost most interest in CMS, thus better do not expect that I will spend
time on it.
Shalom-Salam,
Werner
-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 07/08/2014 09:56 AM, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> Kristian,
>
...
> thanks for the pointers! Do you also know the status of CMS
> (x.509) for S/MIME?
>
No, I don't pay too much attention to S/MIME as I have a *strong
preference* for OpenPGP mys
Kristian,
On Monday 07 July 2014 at 16:08:09, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> 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 opportuni
-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 Tue, 17 Dec 2013 20:01, anth...@cajuntechie.org said:
> I know that gnupg is experimenting with ECC and I'm wondering which
> curves the team has decided to use. I know there are some curves that
> are now suspected of being tainted by the NSA through NIST. Has the
> gnupg team ruled using those
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 13:01 -0600, Anthony Papillion wrote:
> I know that gnupg is experimenting with ECC and I'm wondering which
> curves the team has decided to use. I know there are some curves that
> are now suspected of being tainted by the NSA through NIST. Has the
> gnupg team ruled using th
Sven Radde wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Hardeep Singh schrieb:
>> Its a tool for public key encryption using ECC rather than
>> prime number factoring.
> AFAIK, some of the really efficient algorithms for the required math are
> patented.
>
in that case these patents are only valid inside the US, since no E
Hi!
Hardeep Singh schrieb:
> Its a tool for public key encryption using ECC rather than
> prime number factoring.
AFAIK, some of the really efficient algorithms for the required math are
patented.
cu, Sven
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg
Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> Hardeep Singh wrote:
>> What do you all think about this? Should we start building an ECC
>> WOT? :-)
>
> As soon as it gets added to the OpenPGP RFC, then we should. Until
> then, it's premature.
>
So actually, you could, but you need to start lobbying to get it adde
Hardeep Singh wrote:
> What do you all think about this? Should we start building an ECC
> WOT? :-)
As soon as it gets added to the OpenPGP RFC, then we should. Until
then, it's premature.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://list
Mark Kirchner wrote:
/You/ told the list that you "think that the guys [...] at NSA can
break public key crypto quite easily".
Now, that is quite a daring statement, and naturally that provoked
curious questions. And now your reply to that is just "it's my
personal belief"? Um, sorry, but if that
On Wednesday, November 9, 2005, 2:56:41 PM, markus wrote:
> Some of you got the hint, some didn't: As I said early in this thread
> that my opinion of the NSA being able to crack PKC quite easily is
> based on my personal belief, *just like one might believe in god or
> not*. I do not feel inclined
* Johan Wevers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> markus reichelt wrote:
>
> >> What makes you think the NSA doesn't want to decrypt US government
> >> traffic?
>
> > I don't care what the NSA wants.
>
> I meant to say that, as others also pointed out, that this can mean
> that the NSA will promote e
markus reichelt wrote:
>> What makes you think the NSA doesn't want to decrypt US government
>> traffic?
> I don't care what the NSA wants.
I meant to say that, as others also pointed out, that this can mean that
the NSA will promote encryption that they think they alone can crack.
--
ir. J.C.
* Werner Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 19:32:07 +0100, markus reichelt said:
>
> > I put the speculations aside and stick with the fact that the NSA
> > recommends ECC for government use. That's enough for _me_.
>
> There is a rationale reason why NIST (not the NSA) will
* Johan Wevers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> markus reichelt wrote:
>
> >I put the speculations aside and stick with the fact that the NSA
> >recommends ECC for government use. That's enough for _me_.
>
> What makes you think the NSA doesn't want to decrypt US government
> traffic?
I don't care
On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 19:32:07 +0100, markus reichelt said:
> I put the speculations aside and stick with the fact that the NSA
> recommends ECC for government use. That's enough for _me_.
There is a rationale reason why NIST (not the NSA) will go for ECC:
The forthcoming extended DSA versions usi
markus reichelt wrote:
>I put the speculations aside and stick with the fact that the NSA
>recommends ECC for government use. That's enough for _me_.
What makes you think the NSA doesn't want to decrypt US government
traffic?
--
ir. J.C.A. Wevers // Physics and science fiction site:
[E
John W. Moore III wrote:
>Perhaps he believes TRANSLTR actually exists.
According to that book, it could only crack 64 bit ciphers. No big deal,
distributed.net did that too and all symmetric ciphers in pgp/gpg are
at least 128 bits.
--
ir. J.C.A. Wevers // Physics and science fiction
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
Is it because you think they have so much computer power at Ft. Meade that
they can use exhaustive search? Or do you think their mathematicians
are so
much better than the general public (including math professors who
specialize in this stuff) that they have discovered
* Jean-David Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I put the speculations aside and stick with the fact that the NSA
> > recommends ECC for government use. That's enough for _me_.
> >
> I guess it depends on how your paranoia works, and about whom you
> choose to be paranoid. Does the NSA recomme
On 11/4/05, Jean-David Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess it depends on how your paranoia works, and about whom you choose to
> be paranoid. Does the NSA recommend ECC for government use so that another
> government agency (e.g., the NSA) can read, if necessary or desired by the
> parties t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
markus reichelt wrote:
> * Jean-David Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> markus reichelt wrote (in part):
>>
>>
>>> Mainly, because I think that the guys with the small ... glasses ;-)
>>> at NSA can break public key crypto quite easily,
>>
>
* Jean-David Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> markus reichelt wrote (in part):
>
> > Mainly, because I think that the guys with the small ... glasses
> > ;-) at NSA can break public key crypto quite easily,
>
> Could you give a basis for this assertion?
Well... please understand that it is my
* "John W. Moore III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps he believes TRANSLTR actually exists.
Perhaps he does not even know what TRANSLTR is, exactly. But he does
know about A.
--
left blank, right bald
pgp6Oio1k78rp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
__
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> markus reichelt wrote (in part):
>
>
>>>Mainly, because I think that the guys with the small ... glasses
>>>;-) at NSA can break public key crypto quite easily,
>
>
> Could you give a basis for this assertion?
>
> Is i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
markus reichelt wrote (in part):
> Mainly, because I think that the guys with the small ... glasses
> ;-) at NSA can break public key crypto quite easily,
Could you give a basis for this assertion?
Is it because you think they have so much computer
* Christoph Anton Mitterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >* Christoph Anton Mitterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>do you know of an application that uses this lib?
> >>>
> >>No I don't but that shouldn't be a reason to forget about it,...
> >>
> >Now why is that? I didn't imply anythi
Alphax wrote:
Is it in OpenPGP yet?
I think there are IDs reserved for it,... but not sure if the whole
algorithm/system is contained in RFC2440...
Regards,
Topas.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/
markus reichelt wrote:
* Christoph Anton Mitterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
do you know of an application that uses this lib?
No I don't but that shouldn't be a reason to forget about it,...
Now why is that? I didn't imply anything to such extent.
Of course,... (and I did
* Christoph Anton Mitterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>What about using that uhm,.. libecc
> >>(http://libecc.sourceforge.net/)?
> >>
> >do you know of an application that uses this lib?
> No I don't but that shouldn't be a reason to forget about it,...
Now why is that? I didn't imply anyth
Alex Mauer wrote:
Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Do you remember when, I think it was BBC, claimed they had a patent in
the US which would cover hyperlinks?
It was British Telecom. google:"british telecom" hyperlink patent
Ah,.. ok *g*
But you see my point? Well,.. I indeed have n
markus reichelt wrote:
* Christoph Anton Mitterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What about using that uhm,.. libecc
(http://libecc.sourceforge.net/)?
do you know of an application that uses this lib?
No I don't but that shouldn't be a reason to forget about it,...
it seems to be on h
Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Do you remember when, I think it was BBC, claimed they had a patent in
> the US which would cover hyperlinks?
It was British Telecom. google:"british telecom" hyperlink patent
--
Bad - You get pulled over for doing 90 in a school zone and you're drunk
off your
* Christoph Anton Mitterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >No, we will however add some ECC support into Libgcrypt as time
> >permits.
> >
> What about using that uhm,.. libecc
> (http://libecc.sourceforge.net/)?
do you know of an application that uses this lib? it seems to be on
hold. mailinglist
Werner Koch wrote:
I know that, of course, but I think that perhaps we'll have no ECC the
next 10 years or so,.. if noone makes the step,...
Uhm,.. I probably have not that detailed knowlegde as you,... but when
I've read the comparisions of cryptographical strength it seemed that
ECC wit
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 15:51:08 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer said:
> Goverments are often trying to restrict cryptography (see US) and also
> here in Germany (using X.509 only which is in my opinion less secure
There is no restriction to X.509 in Germany. It just a matter of fact
that the very
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 00:51:50 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer said:
> I know that, of course, but I think that perhaps we'll have no ECC the
> next 10 years or so,.. if noone makes the step,...
There is no reason for ECC. Even chip cards are getting powerful
enough not to need ECC for cost reaso
David Shaw wrote:
That would work if GnuPG stood alone, but it doesn't. New algorithms
or message constructions need to be discussed and worked out as part
of a standard so that all programs can interoperate.
I know that, of course, but I think that perhaps we'll have no ECC the
next 10 yea
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 03:51:08PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> John Clizbe wrote:
>
> >Well, first it has to make it into the OpenPGP Standard. And usually to do
> >that, it would likely need to be part of some governmental or business
> >standard so that large numbers of end-users wo
John Clizbe wrote:
Well, first it has to make it into the OpenPGP Standard. And usually to do
that, it would likely need to be part of some governmental or business
standard so that large numbers of end-users would want/need it.
I think that should be implemented despite of the way goverments
Topas wrote:
> Hi.
>
> When are we going to have ECC support in GnuPG?
>
Well, first it has to make it into the OpenPGP Standard. And usually to do
that, it would likely need to be part of some governmental or business
standard so that large numbers of end-users would want/need it.
Second, most
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 06:33:37PM +0200, Topas wrote:
> Hi.
>
> When are we going to have ECC support in GnuPG?
There is an experimental patch at
http://alumnes.eps.udl.es/~d4372211/index.en.html
However, there will not be official support in GnuPG until the OpenPGP
standard gets ECC support.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Topas wrote:
> Hi.
>
> When are we going to have ECC support in GnuPG?
>
Is it in OpenPGP yet?
- --
Alphax | /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 |X Against HTM
44 matches
Mail list logo
