Hi,
I'd like to use my MUA on an a regular desktop computer that also runs
web browsers and other potentially buggy software. I don't want to
have my PGP keys on that computer. However, would it still be possible
for the MUA to ask a separate computer to sign emails for me? (The
separate computer
Hi everyone!
Sorry if you get two of these, I screwed up while subscribing
to the list.
I have a question relating to the symmetric encryption. If I do
gpg -c foo-file
and enter a passphrase, I get an encrypted foo-file.gpg.
Is there a way to tell that it is an encrypted file just by
looking at
Melikamp The Medley writes:
> and enter a passphrase, I get an encrypted foo-file.gpg.
gpg seems to be able to determine the cipher used:
$ gpg foo-file.gpg
gpg: CAST5 encrypted data
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnu
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:52:29AM -0500, Melikamp The Medley wrote:
> Sorry if you get two of these, I screwed up while subscribing
> to the list.
>
> I have a question relating to the symmetric encryption. If I do
>
> gpg -c foo-file
>
> and enter a passphrase, I get an encrypted foo-file.gpg.
Thanks for your answers, David, Timo.
A somewhat related question: is there a tool that is designed
to produce "undetectable" encryption, i.e. something that is
very plausibly random? I gather from your answers that gpg does
not do that.
___
Gnupg-users
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
November 17th for David SMITH
Linux do not have a file command, that belogs to the rest of the OS.
Linux is only a kernel than is commonly used with the GNU Operating
System, but the name for that system is GNU or GNU/Linux.
In advance thanks by yo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
November 17th for gnupg-users@gnupg.org
I need GNU PG 2 because i want to get out of the 1024 bits limit and
SHA forced for DSA, i want my next key (2010-2012) to be more secure
and accept some SHA2.
Charly Avital: Please note than Linux is a Kernel
Melikamp The Medley wrote:
> I mean, is there a reliable way to tell that something is _not_ an
> encrypted file?
If you mean, "a reliable way to tell that something is not an
OpenPGP-encrypted file," then yes: check the OpenPGP header at the
beginning of the message.
If you mean, "a reliable way
Mario Castelán Castro wrote:
> I need GNU PG 2 because i want to get out of the 1024 bits limit and
> SHA forced for DSA, i want my next key (2010-2012) to be more secure
> and accept some SHA2.
GnuPG 1.4.7 or later (? on the precise version #) supports longer DSAs
and better hash algorithms. You
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Mario Castelán Castro escribió:
> November 17th for gnupg-users@gnupg.org
>
> I need GNU PG 2 because i want to get out of the 1024 bits limit and
> SHA forced for DSA, i want my next key (2010-2012) to be more secure
> and accept some SHA2.
You
On Nov 17, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
Mario Castelán Castro wrote:
I need GNU PG 2 because i want to get out of the 1024 bits limit and
SHA forced for DSA, i want my next key (2010-2012) to be more secure
and accept some SHA2.
GnuPG 1.4.7 or later (? on the precise version #) s
On Nov 17, 2009, at 12:38 PM, Melikamp T. Medley wrote:
Thanks for your answers, David, Timo.
A somewhat related question: is there a tool that is designed
to produce "undetectable" encryption, i.e. something that is
very plausibly random? I gather from your answers that gpg does
not do that.
On Nov 17, 2009, at 3:54 PM, Mario Castelán Castro wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
November 17th for David SMITH
Linux do not have a file command, that belogs to the rest of the OS.
Linux is only a kernel than is commonly used with the GNU Operating
System, but the name
benoit.an...@orange-ftgroup.com wrote:
> Hello,
>
> have installed Gpg4win 2.0.1 (2009-09-28). Default setup.
> am running windows XP SP2
> outlook 2003 -(11.8206.8221) SP3
>
> I managed to create the keys and import someelse key.
> No pbm sending encrypted email - they are ok at the destinatio
Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote:
> Melikamp The Medley writes:
>> and enter a passphrase, I get an encrypted foo-file.gpg.
>
> gpg seems to be able to determine the cipher used:
>
> $ gpg foo-file.gpg
> gpg: CAST5 encrypted data
When I try this with gpg2 I get the following:
gpg2 bunsen_honeydew.jp
Mario Castelán Castro wrote:
> November 14th 2009 for gnupg-users@gnupg.org subject "Problem with the
> agent, gpg2"
>
> Hi, I sucefulle compiled and installed GNU PG 2.0.12 but when i do
> some operation than requires a password i get a message like the
> following.
It was never clear to me from
Susan Stewart wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I'm filing a bug for my IM client (Gajim) because it currently only
> allows sending of encrypted and/or signed presence or messages to
> contacts whose keys I trust ultimately (trust level 5). The
> documentation at http://gnupg.org/gph/en/manual.html#AEN346
Mario Castelán Castro wrote:
> November 17th for gnupg-users@gnupg.org
>
> I need GNU PG 2 because i want to get out of the 1024 bits limit and
> SHA forced for DSA, i want my next key (2010-2012) to be more secure
> and accept some SHA2.
GnuPG 2.0 is not needed for DSA > 1024 GnuPG 1.4.x has su
Thank you, Robert.
OK so I looked it up and I think what I want is called "deniable encryption".
I was just hoping that people here would recommend some FOSS tool to
deniably encrypt individual files. If there is no such tool, I am just going to
write one.
The rest of this message describes the k
Melikamp T. Medley wrote:
> OK so I looked it up and I think what I want is called "deniable
> encryption".
What you've described here isn't deniable encryption, not as I know it
to be. This shouldn't be too surprising, given there are tons of things
I don't know about. :)
> (3) Can add salt (l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
November 17th 2009 for gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Hi, I suggest to search for steganography, the cience/art of hidding
messages.
I never used a program than do steganography but search for one, there
must be a lot of free (as in freedom) ones. LSB stegano
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
November 17th for gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Thanks by the --enable-dsa2 tip.
Someone can tellme wath line should i put on my gpg.cong?.
BTW I also want to remove sha1 from my key preferences. I understand
than the standard requires to support sha1 but i
* Mario Castelán Castro wrote:
> I need GNU PG 2 because i want to get out of the 1024 bits limit
> and SHA forced for DSA, i want my next key (2010-2012) to be more
> secure and accept some SHA2.
You don't need gpg2 for that.
--
left blank, right bald
pgpdWVrO5XZaK.pgp
Description: PGP sign
Mario Castelán Castro wrote:
> Thanks by the --enable-dsa2 tip.
>
> Someone can tellme wath line should i put on my gpg.cong?.
enable-dsa2
> BTW I also want to remove sha1 from my key preferences.
Can't be done. The OpenPGP standard requires that it be present. Even
if you explicitly remove i
Hi list,
one lame confusion I'm facing now.
I was reading GnuPG's "Signing Subkey Cross-Certification" page [1],
and as a matter of fact, these two simple doubts did arise.
Suppose one provides the command:
gpg --gen-key
and chooses the default "DSA and Elgamal" option.
1st doubt:
DSA will be
On Nov 17, 2009, at 10:00 PM, M.B.Jr. wrote:
Hi list,
one lame confusion I'm facing now.
I was reading GnuPG's "Signing Subkey Cross-Certification" page [1],
and as a matter of fact, these two simple doubts did arise.
Suppose one provides the command:
gpg --gen-key
and chooses the default "D
26 matches
Mail list logo
