Hi,
please move future message threads to the gnupg-devel@ list. Longer
technical discussions on gnupg-users@ are not appropriate.
Thanks,
Werner
--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Auschnahme regelt ein Bundeschgesetz.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnup
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:19 PM, David Shaw wrote:
> build-packet.c:build_sig_subpkt()
> sign.c:make_keysig_packet()
> sign.c:update_keysig_packet()
Thanks :-)
I'll have a look at it and come back to you if I should have questions ;-)
Peter
___
Gnup
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 05:22:01PM +0100, Peter Thomas wrote:
> Hi David.
>
> One more thing on this:
>
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 5:18 AM, David Shaw wrote:
> >> Would gnupg understand these subpackets in a 0x1F signature?
> > Yes. It's a valid key as per the spec, even though no program actual
Hi David.
One more thing on this:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 5:18 AM, David Shaw wrote:
>> Would gnupg understand these subpackets in a 0x1F signature?
> Yes. It's a valid key as per the spec, even though no program actually
> generates such a key that I know of. Note that I can't make that same
On Jan 27, 2009, at 10:02 AM, ved...@hush.com wrote:
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:31:39 -0500
From: David Shaw
Subject: Re: Series of minor questions about OpenPGP 1
Old programs will basically blow up if they see something they
don't
understand. There is a special packet, the Marker Packet (t
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:02, ved...@hush.com said:
> how does gnupg manage to maintain 16, 32, 64 bit
There is and will never be a 16 bit version of GnuPG.
Under Windows we currently only support 32 bit.
Salam-Shalom,
Werner
--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Auschnahme regelt ein Bundeschgesetz
>Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:31:39 -0500
>From: David Shaw
>Subject: Re: Series of minor questions about OpenPGP 1
>Old programs will basically blow up if they see something they
>don't
>understand. There is a special packet, the Marker Packet (tag 10)
>which basically exists to make PGP 2.x prin
On Jan 26, 2009, at 6:20 PM, Peter Thomas wrote:
It's used for designated revocation signatures. There is no reason
why it *couldn't* be used for key expiration or key flags, but 0x13
works just as well for this. OpenPGP supports both 0x1F and 0x13
(0x10, 0x11, 0x12), and historically people u
Hi David.
btw: Thanks for your excellent answers. Great to have one of the RFC
authors here :-)
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:28 PM, David Shaw wrote:
> It's a "token", that can be given from one person to another. The
> token contains only what is stated inside the signature itself. Let's
> say
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 10:54:55PM +0100, Peter Thomas wrote:
> Hi again.
>
> This is about signature types and how gnupg uses them.
>
> I've looked through the signature types in chapter 5.2.1
>
> 1) The 0x02 standalone signature: What is its intended use (by the
> standard) and is it ever used
Hi again.
This is about signature types and how gnupg uses them.
I've looked through the signature types in chapter 5.2.1
1) The 0x02 standalone signature: What is its intended use (by the
standard) and is it ever used by gnupg?
I mean it's clear to me that it signs just it's own subpackets, but
11 matches
Mail list logo
