-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Friday 8 November 2013 at 12:00:56 PM, in
, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>
> It
> seems to me that the BAT does not support Comodo CA.
> Uwe
Aside from the ones I have added, The Bat has about 120 root CA
certificates. I guess it is a minority-use
>> "MFPA" == MFPA writes:
> Hi
> On Thursday 7 November 2013 at 11:16:36 AM, in
> , Uwe Brauer wrote:
> I had to search for and import some more root certificates from the
> Comodo website before I could encrypt to you using my mailer's
> built-in s/mime.
> Microsoft Cryp
(Before I begin I should say I agree with Mark -- this is commentary,
not disagreement.)
This bug seems to cry out for an add-on. Then people who (think they)
know what they are doing can have the additional convenience, and the
rest can do whatever it is they do now. I would guess there is
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 12:16:36PM +0100, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> >> "MFPA" == MFPA writes:
[snip]
>>> However thunderbird refuses to use yoru public key
>>> claiming it cannot be trusted.
>
>
>> I just searched and found [1] about Thunderbird, which says you can
>> import a copy of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Thursday 7 November 2013 at 11:16:36 AM, in
, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> However it is not necessary I just export our signature
> as a pem file and import in under authorities. Still
> this is very uncomfortable...
I had to search for and impo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Thursday 7 November 2013 at 11:16:36 AM, in
, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> BTW, I see you switched back to pgp, but why do you use
> old inline mode and not pgpmine?
Because I prefer it. I like to see the pgp signature in the message
body instead
>> "MFPA" == MFPA writes:
Hello
[snip]
> But all the hordes who use webmail are pretty-much still out of luck,
> though. (With certain exceptions, such as hushmail.)
Yep, there is penango fore firefox+gmail.
>> Public
>> keys are automatically embedded in the signatures.
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Wednesday 6 November 2013 at 11:42:49 AM, in
, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> Well take for example iOs: using pgp is a sort of a
> nightmare.
So I have heard.
> The reasons why I think smime is easier to use for the
> average user are: smime is
>> "MFPA" == MFPA writes:
Hi
> Hi
> On Monday 4 November 2013 at 10:43:43 PM, in
> , Uwe Brauer wrote:
>> - from my own experience I am convinced that smime
>> is much easierthan gpg[2] for reasons I am not
>> going to repeat here. (I got 7out of 10 of my
>> fr
Hi
On Monday 4 November 2013 at 10:43:43 PM, in
, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> - NSA (among others) has abused its resource to
> read emailworldwide at a very large scale.
Indeed.
> - so if a lot of people, say 30 % of all users
> would encrypt theiremail, then NSA statisti
>> "MFPA" == MFPA writes:
Hello
> There are already several private sector CAs who provide free S/MIME
> certificates in the hope that punters may take one of their paid
> products instead or in addition. Potential sales is their incentive to
> provide some products free. What wou
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Monday 4 November 2013 at 2:02:30 PM, in
, MFPA wrote:
> Where actual identity is not required, just continuity
> of communication, I see no value in obtaining any
> certification at all.
Or, indeed, where encryption is required but not a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Sunday 3 November 2013 at 10:02:14 PM, in
, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>>> "Ingo" == Ingo Klöcker writes:
>> So, your point/hope probably was that a government
>based CA > wouldn't have such a business model and
>would instead offer thi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Saturday 2 November 2013 at 6:48:39 PM, in
, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> Your point being?
> I presume it goes like this: NSA is "a government
> based organisation" doing, among other things,
> violations of civil rights.
> So any other governme
>> "Ingo" == Ingo Klöcker writes:
> I interpreted "especially because of all which was lately revealed about
> the NSA"
No it was more of a general remark, concerning NSA malpractice of
reading everybody's (uncrypted) email unconditionally.
> So, your point/hope probably was that a
"Robert J. Hansen" wrote:
> My previous email was pretty dry and impersonal. This one is very personal.
>
> > Isn't the NSA "a government based organisation?" Surely
> > guilt-by-association renders every government based organisation just
> > as nefarious as the NSA.
>
> My current job
> John
On Saturday 02 November 2013 19:48:39 Uwe Brauer wrote:
> >> "MFPA" == MFPA writes:
>> Hi
>> On Sunday 27 October 2013 at 2:46:05 PM, in
>> , Uwe Brauer wrote:
>>
>> Isn't the NSA "a government based organisation?" Surely
>> guilt-by-association renders every government b
On 02.11.2013 20:20, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 02/11/13 19:48, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>> So either you claim to have evidence that this modules have been hacked
>> and the key pair is transferred to some of these evil organisations or I
>> really don't see your point.
>
> I think the most common way fo
On 02/11/13 19:48, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> So either you claim to have evidence that this modules have been hacked
> and the key pair is transferred to some of these evil organisations or I
> really don't see your point.
I think the most common way for an X.509 CA to be deceitful is by giving someone
>> "MFPA" == MFPA writes:
> Hi
> On Sunday 27 October 2013 at 2:46:05 PM, in
> , Uwe Brauer wrote:
> Isn't the NSA "a government based organisation?" Surely
> guilt-by-association renders every government based organisation just
> as nefarious as the NSA.
Your point being?
I
On 2-11-2013 15:36, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> I can't help but think, as I see the tenor of the discussion about the
> NSA, that there are probably thousands of good and decent people in that
> agency who are concerned with following the law and respecting civil
> liberties -- and they probably fe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Saturday 2 November 2013 at 2:36:27 PM, in
, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> They are not practicing guilt by suspicion. They are
> practicing, "hey, let's collect as much information as
> possible on this crime so that we can find the truly
> gu
> I wish to extend my sincere and unreserved apologies to all the people
> I unintentionally offended.
Thank you for this. (Seriously.)
There's an American movie that probably hasn't been seen much in Europe.
_High Noon_, starring Gary Cooper, which may be the finest Western ever
made. In a nu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Friday 1 November 2013 at 6:47:56 PM, in
,
Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> Isn't the NSA "a government based organisation?"
>> Surely guilt-by-association renders every government
>> based organisation just as nefarious as the NSA.
> This is wh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Friday 1 November 2013 at 7:25:30 PM, in
,
Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> But since some of
> my R&D funding comes from the government, I'm just as
> nefarious as the NSA.
[...]
> John Moore III, who hasn't been seen on this list in
[...]
> Ap
My previous email was pretty dry and impersonal. This one is very personal.
Isn't the NSA "a government based organisation?" Surely
guilt-by-association renders every government based organisation just
as nefarious as the NSA.
My current job is in software forensics -- discovering new ways to
Isn't the NSA "a government based organisation?" Surely
guilt-by-association renders every government based organisation just
as nefarious as the NSA.
This is why grown-ups don't believe in guilt by association.
To take an example: the graduate students at the University of Iowa
who teach und
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Sunday 27 October 2013 at 2:46:05 PM, in
, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> I would prefer a government based organisation which
> provides this service to its citizen (especially
> because of all which was lately revealed about the NSA)
Isn't the NSA
>> "Werner" == Werner Koch writes:
> On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 10:23, p...@heypete.com said:
>> Correct, though it is possible (but usually recommend against) to
>> create a new certificate using the same private keypair as before. In
> The business model of most CAs is to sell you a subsc
On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 10:23, p...@heypete.com said:
> Correct, though it is possible (but usually recommend against) to
> create a new certificate using the same private keypair as before. In
The business model of most CAs is to sell you a subscription by setting
the expiration time very low so tha
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>
>> If you generate a new keypair for the new certificate (which is
>> probably a good idea) then gpgsm (and presumably any other
>> certificate-using software) will figure out what private key will be
>> needed to decrypt a part
> If you generate a new keypair for the new certificate (which is
> probably a good idea) then gpgsm (and presumably any other
> certificate-using software) will figure out what private key will be
> needed to decrypt a particular message and, so long as you still have
> the private
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>>> "Werner" == Werner Koch writes:
>
>> On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 22:03, o...@mat.ucm.es said:
>>> know by the date of the certificate which certificate to use for which
>>> message?
>>>
>>> - old for old messages
>
>> Note, t
>> "Werner" == Werner Koch writes:
> On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 22:03, o...@mat.ucm.es said:
>> know by the date of the certificate which certificate to use for which
>> message?
>>
>> - old for old messages
> Note, that there is no need for a certificate for decryption - only the
On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 22:03, o...@mat.ucm.es said:
> know by the date of the certificate which certificate to use for which
> message?
>
> - old for old messages
Note, that there is no need for a certificate for decryption - only the
private key is required. The certificate is only used to sh
>> "Werner" == Werner Koch writes:
> On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 12:02, o...@mat.ucm.es said:
>> Can gpgsm deal with this situation?
> Sure. That is a very common situation.
> Although I am myself not using gpgsm for mail encryption, I use it to
> maintain all kind of X.509 certificates
On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 12:02, o...@mat.ucm.es said:
> Can gpgsm deal with this situation?
Sure. That is a very common situation.
Although I am myself not using gpgsm for mail encryption, I use it to
maintain all kind of X.509 certificates. FWIW, gpgsm passed several
conformance tests with quite g
Hello
I use gpgsm, via gnus+Xemacs and I have installed a free certificate
from Comodo. This certificate expires in a couple of weeks and I have to
apply for a new one. However I need the old one to read old messages.
Can gpgsm deal with this situation?
thanks
Uwe Brauer
smime.p7s
Descriptio
38 matches
Mail list logo
