Dear all,
I have GnuPG 1.4.11 left over from a former installation. Since I
upgraded to GnuPG 2.0.22 during the installation of GPG-Suite for Mac OS
(10. 8. 5 – Mountain Lion) I do not need the older version. Is it
possible to remove it without hurting my keyrings?
Thank you in advance for your h
On 23/01/14 17:27, Werner Koch wrote:
> is anyone interested in a BoF at FOSDEM on February 1 or 2? Anything
> special to put on the agenda? How long should we plan 30, 45 or 60
> minutes?
Sound like a good plan. My preference would be the 1st of February
around lunch.
Cheers,
arne
--
Arne Re
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:28, arne.renkema-pad...@cased.de said:
> Sound like a good plan. My preference would be the 1st of February
> around lunch.
Well, the BoF rooms are assigned on a first come first served base.
Thus we can't sign up for a certain time. I am fine with Saturday, but
better not
what are the factors involved in creating such discrepancies with folks'
public key lengths ?
i mean, some people's are 5 monitors high where as the other joe has
seemingly created a similar key and that key is one half a monitor in
'monitor' height
what does all this mean ?
how have people such
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:24 PM, shm...@riseup.net wrote:
> what are the factors involved in creating such discrepancies with folks'
> public key lengths ?
As far as I can tell, the two major factors that affect the size of
public keys are:
1. Key length. (That is, a 4096-bit key will be larger t
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 00:24:14 +1100
"shm...@riseup.net" wrote:
> what are the factors involved in creating such discrepancies with folks'
> public key lengths ?
>
> i mean, some people's are 5 monitors high where as the other joe has
> seemingly created a similar key and that key is one half a mo
On 24.01.2014, Leo Gaspard wrote:
> Actually, this is something I never understood. Why should people create a
> revocation certificate and store it in a safe place, instead of backing up the
> main key?
Because a backup only makes sense when it's stored in a diffrent place
than the key itself:
On 1/24/2014 8:42 AM, Pete Stephenson wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the two major factors that affect the size of
> public keys are:
> 1. Key length. (That is, a 4096-bit key will be larger than a 2048-bit
> or 1024-bit key.)
> 2. Number of signatures on the key. A brand-new key will be
> consider
Steve Jones:
> On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 00:24:14 +1100 "shm...@riseup.net"
> wrote:
>
>> what are the factors involved in creating such discrepancies with
>> folks' public key lengths ?
>>
>> i mean, some people's are 5 monitors high where as the other joe
>> has seemingly created a similar key and
Pete Stephenson:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:24 PM, shm...@riseup.net wrote:
>> what are the factors involved in creating such discrepancies with folks'
>> public key lengths ?
>
> As far as I can tell, the two major factors that affect the size of
> public keys are:
> 1. Key length. (That is,
On 01/23/2014 05:50 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
> I've been thinking about UIDs in keys, rfc4880 section 5.1 says that by
> convention a UID is an rfc2822 email address but this is not a
> requirement[1]. Gnupg does enforce that restriction unless you explicitly
> disable it. It would seem to make se
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 04:38:19PM -0800, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> >Well... I don't know how you type
>
> With a nine-volt battery, a paperclip, and a USB cable that has only one end
> -- the other is bare wires. You wouldn't believe how difficult it is to do
> the initial handshake, but once yo
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:47:15AM +0100, Werner Koch wrote:
> [...]
>
> > the usefulness of revocation certificate, just the advice always popping
> > out to
> > generate a revocation certificate in any case, without thinking of whether
> > it
> > would be useful.
>
> Okay, that is a different
On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 12:15:40 -0500
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> There are already systems that make use of the flexibility in this
> field. For example SSH hosts can publish their RSA host key in an
> OpenPGP certificate using the monkeysphere (i'm a contributor to the
> monkeysphere project):
>
I think it makes a lot of sense to be able to associate more things with
OpenPGP keys. I'm particularly interested in seeing OTR keys and XMPP
identities in OpenPGP keys.
.hc
On 01/23/2014 05:50 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
> I've been thinking about UIDs in keys, rfc4880 section 5.1 says that by
>
On 24/01/14 13:03, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:28, arne.renkema-pad...@cased.de said:
>
>> Sound like a good plan. My preference would be the 1st of February
>> around lunch.
>
> Well, the BoF rooms are assigned on a first come first served base.
> Thus we can't sign up for a cert
On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 21:14, arne.renkema-pad...@cased.de said:
> My personal pet-problem is the usability of tools like GPG.
Okay, thus we have
- Report on current keyserver work [Kristian]
- Make GPG invisible to the user [Arne]
- ECC and GnuPG progress [Werner]
Shalom-Salam,
Werner
On 01/24/2014 12:48 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 12:15:40 -0500 Daniel Kahn Gillmor
> wrote:
>
>> http://web.monkeysphere.info/
>
> This looks pretty cool, and does cover some of the things I've been
> thinking about. I've been wondering about communications secured with
> OpenP
On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 17:16:28 -0500
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> what do you mean "complete connection security via OpenPGP"? OpenPGP
> is not a stream-based communications protocol, it's a specification
> of a message format and a certificate format. Inventing a new
> stream-based communicatio
19 matches
Mail list logo
