On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 02:41, da...@systemoverlord.com said:
> Other than on systems where $HOME is on a filesystem that does not
> support sockets (e.g., NFS/CIFS/etc.), is anyone aware of an issue with
> the use of --use-standard-socket? Seems like it would make restarting
GnuPG 2.1 will use --us
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On 02/28/2011 06:49 PM, David Tomaschik wrote:
>> Each process has its own copy of the environment inherited from its
>> parent, so it's not possible to change the GPG_AGENT_INFO variable for
>> all processes. You could start gpg-agent with --use-standard-socket,
>> an
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 20:16, k...@grant-olson.net said:
> If you want someone to cleanup and update the howto, I volunteer. I
> just need to know the name of the cvs project. 'card-howto' didn't seem
> to work.
It is the module "card-howto" in the gpgweb repository. However, I
recently started t
I believe that within the next five years someone will discover an academic
attack against Rijndael. I do not believe that anyone will ever discover an
attack that will allow someone to read Rijndael traffic. So while I have
serious academic reservations about Rijndael, I do not have any engineeri
Hi,
I´m trying to move a private Key (RSA, PEM format) made by a Microsoft CA to
the GPF Crypto Stick.
gpgsm tells me while importing:
> pgsm: no issuer found in certificate
> gpgsm: basic certificate checks failed - not imported
> ERROR: object length field 1 octects too large
> ERROR: object
Not GPG specific, but I was wondering if someone could point me in the
direction of some resources that explain why we use different keys to
sign and encrypt (for cases where the same key _could_ do both e.g.
RSA). I cant seem to pick anything up on google.
Thanks
--
Guy Halford-Thompson - http
Op 28-2-2011 23:23, Robert J. Hansen schreef:
> He then learned that his users thought the banner across the top was
> "just another one of those annoying Flash ads," and they tuned it out.
Their senses were dulled by overadvertising. He had better also
distributed Adblock Plus to try to counter
On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 09:40:07PM -0500 Also sprach David Tomaschik:
I've recently received my smart card, but was wondering what the "best
practices" are, mainly from a physical standpoint. When I use it in
my laptop reader, it sticks about 2" out of the side, and I have some
concern about th
Hello!
We are pleased to announce version 1.2.0 of Libksba.
Libksba is an X.509 and CMS (PKCS#7) library. It is for example
required to build the S/MIME part of GnuPG-2 (gpgsm). The only build
requirement for Libksba itself is the libgpg-error package. There are
no other dependencies; actual c
Hi,
I am planning to use gnuPG (v1.4.10) binary in netbsd 5 for encryption. The
key generation is supported as interactive session, but I want to use non
interactive session. I could not find any binary with non interactive session.
Does anyone know where to get such a binary??
Regards,
Rav
But doesnt GPG generate 2 private keys (as well as public keys) when
you create a new keypair?
Please select what kind of key you want:
(1) RSA and RSA (default)
(2) DSA and Elgamal
(3) DSA (sign only)
(4) RSA (sign only
I can understand if you use DSA and Elgamal (DSA can only sign)
On Mar 1, 2011, at 8:13 AM, Guy Halford-Thompson wrote:
> Not GPG specific, but I was wondering if someone could point me in the
> direction of some resources that explain why we use different keys to
> sign and encrypt (for cases where the same key _could_ do both e.g.
> RSA). I cant seem to pic
On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 01:13:16PM + Also sprach Guy Halford-Thompson:
Not GPG specific, but I was wondering if someone could point me in the
direction of some resources that explain why we use different keys to
sign and encrypt (for cases where the same key _could_ do both e.g.
RSA).
Thi
On Mar 1, 2011, at 7:39 AM, ravi shankar wrote:
> Hi,
>
>I am planning to use gnuPG (v1.4.10) binary in netbsd 5 for encryption.
> The key generation is supported as interactive session, but I want to use non
> interactive session. I could not find any binary with non interactive
> session
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Guy Halford-Thompson wrote:
> Not GPG specific, but I was wondering if someone could point me in the
> direction of some resources that explain why we use different keys to
> sign and encrypt (for cases where the same key _could_ do both e.g.
> RSA). I cant seem to
Thanks for the list of resources
G
On 1 March 2011 14:41, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Guy Halford-Thompson wrote:
>> Not GPG specific, but I was wondering if someone could point me in the
>> direction of some resources that explain why we use different keys to
>> sig
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:34 AM, wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 01:13:16PM + Also sprach Guy Halford-Thompson:
>>
>> Not GPG specific, but I was wondering if someone could point me in the
>> direction of some resources that explain why we use different keys to
>> sign and encrypt (for cases
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 14:30:37 +, Guy Halford-Thompson wrote:
> But doesnt GPG generate 2 private keys (as well as public keys) when
> you create a new keypair?
>
> Please select what kind of key you want:
>(1) RSA and RSA (default)
>(2) DSA and Elgamal
>(3) DSA (sign only)
>(4)
On Tuesday 01 March 2011, David Shaw wrote:
> On Feb 28, 2011, at 7:09 PM, David Tomaschik wrote:
> >> I think key UIDs generally reveal more information than I am
> >> comfortable with. For example, why does your UID need to contain
> >> your email address in plain text rather than as a hash? Sear
On Sunday 27 February 2011, Doug Barton wrote:
> 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 in
Hi,
I have CentOS 5.5 with gnupg 1.4.5.
I am using the following command to generate the keys:
echo LinuxMasters | /usr/bin/gpg --homedir /home/USER/.gnupg -e -a -r
em...@domain.com > /somefile
The problem I am facing is that until today all the keys generated
using this command had the same siz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Tuesday 1 March 2011 at 8:56:56 PM, in
, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> Hmm. Why do the keyservers need to support it at all?
> IMO the clients that want to upload a key should check
> for this flag and warn the user if a key has this flag.
I thin
On Mar 1, 2011, at 6:29 PM, MFPA wrote:
> On Tuesday 1 March 2011 at 8:56:56 PM, in
> , Ingo Klöcker wrote:
>
>
>> Hmm. Why do the keyservers need to support it at all?
>> IMO the clients that want to upload a key should check
>> for this flag and warn the user if a key has this flag.
>
> I th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Tuesday 1 March 2011 at 1:54:25 AM, in
, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> However, i'm quite serious about the flaws paralleling
> the failures of NSEC3 to prevent DNS zone enumeration.
> the problem space is slightly different, but i think
> t
On 03/01/2011 08:05 PM, MFPA wrote:
> My analogy, admittedly not a direct comparison, would be having a
> phone number that is ex-directory. It is no defence against random
> dialling, nor against your number being recorded from outgoing calls
> if you don't take steps such as withholding the CLI,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Wednesday 2 March 2011 at 1:43:45 AM, in
, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On 03/01/2011 08:05 PM, MFPA wrote:
>> My analogy, admittedly not a direct comparison, would be having a
>> phone number that is ex-directory. It is no defence against
> The benefits of your phone number being ex-directory are the benefits
> that derive from it being harder for people to obtain your phone
> number without your permission, harder to link the number to your
> name/address, and impossible to find your address or phone number by
> looking in the phon
27 matches
Mail list logo
