* Doug Barton [110227 05:30]:
> If you look at the characteristics of the actual messages encrypted mail
> is very similar whether it's in-line or MIME. It's signed messages that
> make things interesting because the signature in a MIME message is
> actually (sort of) an attachment but also sor
* Todd A. Jacobs [110227 04:02]:
> Here are the steps I needed to take under Ubuntu 10.10 to get this
> particular reader working properly as a mortal user.
You could also have run the script [1] linked from the only up-to-date
OpenPGP smartcard howto [2] I'm aware of.
[1] http://download.fsfe.o
* Grant Olson [110227 04:11]:
> I usually just leave it in until I leave the computer for lunch or a
> meeting or whatever.
Same here, but I always take the card with me if I leave the room.
> One thing I didn't realize at first, is that once you've unlocked either
> your encryption or authentic
On Saturday, February 26, 2011, MFPA wrote:
> Hi
>
>
> On Friday 25 February 2011 at 1:45:03 AM, in
>
> , Jameson Rollins wrote:
> > Yikes! I thought we were almost done killing inline
> > signatures! Don't revive it now!
> >
> > If PGP/MIME is broken on android, we need to get them
> > to fi
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 06:43, br...@frogandbear.net said:
> I do find it a little odd that GnuPG's very own (and from the looks of
> it, old) documentation (1) lists the 3121 as a supported reader, along
> with several other outdated models.
Sorry for that, the howto is a bit outdated. Omnikey base
On 2/26/11 9:24 PM, Jameson Rollins wrote:
> http://josefsson.org/inline-openpgp-considered-harmful.html
* IT DOESN'T HANDLE ATTACHMENTS. That's fine with me: 95%+ of my
messages don't require attachments. Any technology that can hit 95% of
the use case is fine by me.
* IT DOESN'T LIKE CHARACTE
Hi All,
I recently installed GPA. I'm trying to locate a friend's public key
by either name or email address. GPA appears to only offer Key ID
(which I don't have).
Does anyone have tricks for locating a key by name or email?
Thanks,
Jeff
___
Gnupg-us
On 02/27/2011 12:21 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> On 2/26/11 9:24 PM, Jameson Rollins wrote:
>> http://josefsson.org/inline-openpgp-considered-harmful.html
>
> * IT DOESN'T HANDLE ATTACHMENTS. That's fine with me: 95%+ of my
> messages don't require attachments. Any technology that can hit 95% o
* David Tomaschik [110227 19:22]:
> How about "inline confuses users who don't know anything about OpenPGP"?
100% agreed. Thank you!
Martin
pgpOXtxwgzgho.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.g
On 02/27/2011 11:40 AM, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 06:43, br...@frogandbear.net said:
>
>> I do find it a little odd that GnuPG's very own (and from the looks of
>> it, old) documentation (1) lists the 3121 as a supported reader, along
>> with several other outdated models.
>
> Sorr
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:54, noloa...@gmail.com said:
> I recently installed GPA. I'm trying to locate a friend's public key
> by either name or email address. GPA appears to only offer Key ID
> (which I don't have).
You have to use the command line:
gpg2 --search-key f...@example.org
then fo
On 2/27/11 1:13 PM, David Tomaschik wrote:
> How about "inline confuses users who don't know anything about OpenPGP"?
1. Why are you sending them signed emails anyway?
2. And seeing strange MIME attachments doesn't confuse people?
___
Gnupg-users mai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
David Tomaschik wrote:
>How about "inline confuses users who don't know anything about
>OpenPGP"?
Meh. If anything, inline signatures sparked conversation.
- --
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-BEGIN PGP SIG
* Robert J. Hansen [110227 20:28]:
> > How about "inline confuses users who don't know anything about OpenPGP"?
>
> 1. Why are you sending them signed emails anyway?
I sign *all* my e-mail except for messages sent from my mobile (in that
case, my signature tells the receiver why the message is
Hi,
I once hoped the discussion about MIME vs. crufty inline signatures has
been settled a long time ago. Today that even Microsoft Outlook handles
it correctly for more than 7 years, the new excuse seems to be some
buggy new mail applications. I don't buy such an excuse. MIME is so
primitive a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 02/27/2011 02:37 PM, Martin Gollowitzer wrote:
> * Robert J. Hansen [110227 20:28]:
>>> How about "inline confuses users who don't know anything about OpenPGP"?
>>
>> 1. Why are you sending them signed emails anyway?
>
> I sign *all* my e-mail
On 2/27/11 2:37 PM, Martin Gollowitzer wrote:
> I sign *all* my e-mail except for messages sent from my mobile (in that
> case, my signature tells the receiver why the message is not signed and
> offers the receiver to request a signed proof of authenticity later) or
> messages to people who can't
On Sunday 27 February 2011, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> David Tomaschik wrote:
> >How about "inline confuses users who don't know anything about
> >OpenPGP"?
>
> Meh. If anything, inline signatures sparked conversation.
Yeah. I think we should stop this pointless discussion. I doubt that any
person
Provider: Boost
Manufacturer: Motorola
Model: I1
Droid version: 1.5
This phone has two mail applications by default, one called 'email' and
another called 'gmail'. Both displayed PGP/MIME messages without any
trouble. Neither verified sigs of course.
I see no easy way to determine the version n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
As usual, Robert explains it clearly and succinctly.
- --Avi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.77
Comment: Most recent key: Click show in box @ http://is.gd/4xJrs
iJcEAREKAEAFAk1qx1I5GGh0dHA6Ly9wZ3AubmljLm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Nothing a simple on-line search won't rectify.
- --Avi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.77
Comment: Most recent key: Click show in box @ http://is.gd/4xJrs
iJgEAREKAEAFAk1qx8U5GGh0dHA6Ly9wZ3AubmljLmFkLmpw
On Feb 27, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>>> 2. And seeing strange MIME attachments doesn't confuse people?
>>
>> Less than strange text fragments at the head and the bottom of a message
>> (Some people even think they are being spammed when they see inline PGP
>> data), because an a
On 02/27/2011 12:37 PM, Martin Gollowitzer wrote:
> I sign *all* my e-mail except for messages sent from my mobile (in that
> case, my signature tells the receiver why the message is not signed and
> offers the receiver to request a signed proof of authenticity later) or
> messages to people who ca
On 02/27/2011 02:04, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
On Saturday, February 26, 2011, MFPA wrote:
Hi
On Friday 25 February 2011 at 1:45:03 AM, in
, Jameson Rollins wrote:
Yikes! I thought we were almost done killing inline
signatures! Don't revive it now!
If PGP/MIME is broken on android, we need to g
On 02/27/2011 00:25, Martin Gollowitzer wrote:
* Doug Barton [110227 05:30]:
If you look at the characteristics of the actual messages encrypted mail
is very similar whether it's in-line or MIME. It's signed messages that
make things interesting because the signature in a MIME message is
actual
On Feb 27, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> On 2/27/11 2:37 PM, Martin Gollowitzer wrote:
>> I sign *all* my e-mail except for messages sent from my mobile (in that
>> case, my signature tells the receiver why the message is not signed and
>> offers the receiver to request a signed proo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
El 27-02-2011 15:30, Martin Gollowitzer escribió:
> * David Tomaschik [110227 19:22]:
>> How about "inline confuses users who don't know anything about OpenPGP"?
>
> 100% agreed. Thank you!
IMHO they would be even more confused if they can read
On 02/27/2011 11:36, Werner Koch wrote:
Hi,
I once hoped the discussion about MIME vs. crufty inline signatures has
been settled a long time ago.
I love/admire your optimism. :)
Today that even Microsoft Outlook handles
it correctly for more than 7 years, the new excuse seems to be some
bugg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Grant Olson wrote:
>Provider: Boost
>Manufacturer: Motorola
>Model: I1
>Droid version: 1.5
>
>This phone has two mail applications by default, one called 'email' and
>another called 'gmail'. Both displayed PGP/MIME messages without any
>trouble.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Faramir wrote:
> El 27-02-2011 15:30, Martin Gollowitzer escribió:
>> * David Tomaschik [110227 19:22]:
>>> How about "inline confuses users who don't know anything about OpenPGP"?
>> 100% agreed. Thank you!
>
>IMHO they would be even more confus
> PGP/MIME (rfc2015, 1996) is not required to display signed MOSS mails.
> We should expect that 1847 has been implemented in any MIME aware MUA;
> in particular as it seems that S/MIME, which is also based on MOSS, does
> work.
"Should" usually just means "I want." The world should be a just pla
On Feb 27, 2011, at 5:17 PM, David Shaw wrote:
> Can I see the HCI study that MIME attachments confuse people? ;)
I would love to see such a study. However, I never made that claim. :)
Someone else made the claim PGP/MIME is superior because inline OpenPGP
signatures confuse people. Okay, I
Hello list,
first of all: Sorry if my question reaches the wrong list, but I have a
question someone on this list may probably answer easily.
If a company has shared keys: How does encryption work then? Are several owners
of a share needed to encrypt data? I just try to find out how it works in
> I disagree with this. Obviously a bad signature doesn't say much (except
> perhaps "check your mail system - it's breaking things"), but there is still
> value in the continuity between multiple signed messages. It's important to
> not make of that more than it is: for all I know there are 2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
El 27-02-2011 20:54, Jean-David Beyer escribió:
> Faramir wrote:
...
>>IMHO they would be even more confused if they can read the message.
>> And some others see the attached signatures and think "Virus! Hit
>> delete, hit delete!".
...
>
> If s
> I'm not at all surprised that you had those results. A limited subset of
> people have support for OpenPGP signatures. A limited subset of those people
> actually verify signatures. A limited subset of those people actually pay
> attention to what those signatures say.
Yes: but one would h
On Feb 27, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> I'm not at all surprised that you had those results. A limited subset of
>> people have support for OpenPGP signatures. A limited subset of those
>> people actually verify signatures. A limited subset of those people
>> actually pay at
On Feb 27, 2011, at 9:38 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> I disagree with this. Obviously a bad signature doesn't say much (except
>> perhaps "check your mail system - it's breaking things"), but there is still
>> value in the continuity between multiple signed messages. It's important to
>> no
On 28/02/11 12:35 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>
> On Feb 27, 2011, at 5:17 PM, David Shaw wrote:
>
>> Can I see the HCI study that MIME attachments confuse people? ;)
>
> I would love to see such a study. However, I never made that claim. :)
>
> Someone else made the claim PGP/MIME is superio
On 28/02/11 2:02 PM, David Shaw wrote:
>
> I'm not at all surprised that you had those results. A limited
> subset of people have support for OpenPGP signatures. A limited
> subset of those people actually verify signatures. A limited subset
> of those people actually pay attention to what thos
> I think we're missing each other here. We have Martin (the real one), the
> fake Martin (let's call him "Marty"), and various other people on a mailing
> list. Martin always signs his messages. One day Marty shows up and tries to
> pretend to be Martin. Martin, not wanting someone else to
On Feb 27, 2011, at 10:27 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> I think we're missing each other here. We have Martin (the real one), the
>> fake Martin (let's call him "Marty"), and various other people on a mailing
>> list. Martin always signs his messages. One day Marty shows up and tries
>> to
On 02/27/2011 08:31 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> the default mail app on a Verizon Droid X running Android 2.2 has broken MIME
> support.
Please post this bit of useful details to the "Android PGP/MIME test
results" thread started by Grant Olson, which actually has an acceptable
signal-to-noise
On 02/27/2011 10:22 PM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 28/02/11 2:02 PM, David Shaw wrote:
>>
>> I'm not at all surprised that you had those results. A limited
>> subset of people have support for OpenPGP signatures. A limited
>> subset of those people actually verify signatures. A limited subset
>> o
> Please post this bit of useful details to the "Android PGP/MIME test
> results" thread started by Grant Olson, which actually has an acceptable
> signal-to-noise ratio.
As I have said a few times now, I have been out of town at a funeral. I have
just now returned and am for the most part exhau
On Feb 27, 2011, at 8:25 PM, Denise Schmid wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> first of all: Sorry if my question reaches the wrong list, but I have a
> question someone on this list may probably answer easily.
>
> If a company has shared keys: How does encryption work then? Are several
> owners of a sha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
El 28-02-2011 0:27, Robert J. Hansen escribió:
...
> Then we're at an impasse, because that claim wouldn't fly with me. Let's
> imagine Fake-Martin and Real-Martin (FM and RM).
>
>
> FM: [message]
> RM: Hey, that's not me! I'm me. See? I've si
Not exactly Android, but FWIW, an iPod touch (which has the same mail program
as an iPhone) displays PGP/MIME just fine (as in shows the mail - but doesn't
verify the signature).
David
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.g
On Feb 27, 2011, at 8:35 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>
> On Feb 27, 2011, at 5:17 PM, David Shaw wrote:
>
>> Can I see the HCI study that MIME attachments confuse people? ;)
>
> I would love to see such a study. However, I never made that claim. :)
>
> Someone else made the claim PGP/MIME is
On Feb 24, 2011, at 9:39 AM, Atom Smasher wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2011, Aaron Toponce wrote:
>
>> However, I was in a discussion with a friend, and the topic came up that it
>> is theoretically possible to rebuild your private key if someone had access
>> to all your signed mail. We debated the
On 28/02/11 2:59 PM, Grant Olson wrote:
>
> I've been toying with the idea of expiring my key and seeing how
> long it takes for anyone to notice. In fact, I've just decided I
> will do this sometime in the next year. It'll be interesting to see
> how long it takes people to notice even after I'
On 02/27/2011 11:29 PM, David Shaw wrote:
> Not exactly Android, but FWIW, an iPod touch (which has the same mail program
> as an iPhone) displays PGP/MIME just fine (as in shows the mail - but doesn't
> verify the signature).
>
> David
>
>
It's worth a lot.
Since the rational behind this th
On 02/27/2011 11:48 PM, Ben McGinnes wrote:
> On 28/02/11 2:59 PM, Grant Olson wrote:
>>
>> I've been toying with the idea of expiring my key and seeing how
>> long it takes for anyone to notice. In fact, I've just decided I
>> will do this sometime in the next year. It'll be interesting to see
>
> - The service provider
Verizon Wireless.
> - The make and model of the phone.
Droid X
> - The droid version.
2.2.1
> - The email application(s) installed.
Unknown: just the default Verizon Wireless email messaging app.
> - If said application(s) displayed the text of a PGP/MIME message so
> It depends on what you mean by a "shared key". There is just giving a
> copy of the key to multiple people (in which case any one of them can use it),
> or there are various key splitting algorithms where a key is broken into a
> number of pieces, and a specified subset of those pieces can come
55 matches
Mail list logo
