Hello!
The GnuPG Project is pleased to announce the availability of a
new release: Version 2.1.0.
The GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) is a complete and free implementation of
the OpenPGP standard as defined by RFC-4880 and better known as PGP.
GnuPG, also known as GPG, allows to encrypt and sign data
Peter,
Thank for your Input. Please help me where I will get the tar File for Qt
pinentry, so that I can install it. If QT Pinetry is not required, when I try
to set up the Passphrase
I get this error
gpg-agent[7931]: can't connect to the PIN entry module: IPC connect call failed
gpg-agent[7931
Koch,
Thank you fir your Help. Yes we are using putty only. Not any Graphical. But it
complains that
You need a Passphrase to protect your secret key.
gpg-agent[7931]: can't connect to the PIN entry module: IPC connect call failed
gpg-agent[7931]: command get_passphrase failed: No pinentry
gpg:
Hi Werner,
Building on OS X using
make -f build-aux/speedo.mk native INSTALL_DIR=/usr/local
gets what looks like most of the way and then fails with the error
shown below. Am I the only person experiencing this, or are others
hitting the same problem?
Best wishes,
N.
Undefined symbols for
Hello,
on
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-announce
there is a link to the archive
http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-announce
but that does not work; it's a strange redirect to
http://lists.gnupg.org:8002/pipermail/gnupg-announce/
Hauke
--
Crypto für alle: http://www.openpgp-
On 05/11/14 22:09, Werner Koch wrote:
> It might be worth to check whether there is an interest in running gpg on
> the server via Putty and have Putty forward the communication of gpg to
> a gpg-agent+pinentry running on Windows.
I think this certainly has its upsides, running the agent on the co
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 12:18, nicholas.c...@gmail.com said:
> make -f build-aux/speedo.mk native INSTALL_DIR=/usr/local
Actually is is INSTALL_PREFIX - I posted a wrong name once.
> gets what looks like most of the way and then fails with the error
> shown below. Am I the only person experiencing
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 14:16, mailinglis...@hauke-laging.de said:
> but that does not work; it's a strange redirect to
> http://lists.gnupg.org:8002/pipermail/gnupg-announce/
It is not strange but the usual way to run a load balancer. I know
that bug and there is even an entry in the tracker.
Sal
Fixed.
Appending a slash to the URL was sufficient to avoid the rewrite.
Shalom-Salam,
Werner
--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/list
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 14:25, pe...@digitalbrains.com said:
> How would this be implemented? I can think of two options: a TCP port,
> forwarded by PuTTY, and an SSH subsystem.
OpenSSH has socket forwarding and that is what I was thinking about.
Similar to a subsystem it uses a channel on the ssh co
Hello Werner and list,
While reading that FAQ top to bottom, I encountered some typo's which I
fixed. I'm only used to git in a non-distributed fashion, so I'm not
accustomed to it's patch submission features and simply attach a
git-generated diff against 0968808. I hope that suffises.
And perhap
Werner Koch:
> I am not one of those short message people but
you're not a twittiot ?
respect
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On 06/11/14 15:40, Werner Koch wrote:
> OpenSSH has socket forwarding and that is what I was thinking about.
Sockets other than TCP you mean? Is this something generic that can be
invoked by using the command-line OpenSSH client? I can't find it.
> To avoid that other users connect to a listening
Hi,
I can’t use speedo.mk as I get "GnuPG has already been build[sic] in-source”.
I’m not going to replace 2.0 at this time so I won’t remove it. With just
‘make’ I get an error on linking libgpg-error. I happen to have versions 0.16
and 0.17 but not 0.13 under the referenced path.
[shell quot
> so I'm not accustomed to it's patch submission features
Ah, I'm glad to see Muphry's Law is still in effect. The world works the
way it's supposed to.
;)
Peter.
--
I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail.
You can send me encrypted mail if you want some privacy.
My ke
Ok I did distclean and here’s the results of speedo for me. Again, libgpg-error
version 0.13 seems to be on the wish list:
ld: warning: ld: warning: directory not found for option
'-L/usr/local/Cellar/libgpg-error/1.13/lib'
directory not found for option '-L/usr/local/Cellar/libgpg-error/1.13/li
There's an odd problem with 2.1.0 on Win32. Steps:
1. Uninstall existing gpg4win.
2. Install the new experimental 2.1.0 Windows installer.
3. Try to pull a key from a keyserver such as:
=
C:\utils>gpg --keyserver pool.sks-keyservers.net --recv-key d5078b4f
gpg: keyserver receive failed:
I made no changes to my gpg.conf file nor to my keyring. I've confirmed
that I have network connectivity and I can hit
http://pool.sks-keyservers.net.
Next round of problems: doing a --list-secret-keys takes considerable
time -- approximately 28 seconds on a fairly modern desktop.
--list-keys
On 11/06/2014 11:12 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> I made no changes to my gpg.conf file nor to my keyring. I've confirmed
>> that I have network connectivity and I can hit
>> http://pool.sks-keyservers.net.
>
> Next round of problems: doing a --list-secret-keys takes considerable
> time -- appro
Good morning/afternoon/evening.
I know that this has been discussed previously, but now that GnuPG modern
has been released with ECC support, is there the intention to add that
support to the classic build in the near-to-internediate future?
Thank you,
Avi
User:Avraham
pub 3072D/F80E29F9 1
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 17:17, d...@fifthhorseman.net said:
> have you converted your keyring to pubring.kbx and moved away the old
> pubring.gpg?
That was not the problem. I think the real problem was that the code to
check whether a secret key exists parsed the entire rest of the keyring
to find
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 16:58, r...@sixdemonbag.org said:
> C:\utils>gpg --keyserver pool.sks-keyservers.net --recv-key d5078b4f
> gpg: keyserver receive failed: Input/output error
Okay, I need to debug this.
Shalom-Salam,
Werner
--
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
I know that this has been discussed previously, but now that GnuPG
modern has been released with ECC support, is there the intention to
add that support to the classic build in the near-to-internediate
future?
The last this was discussed the answer was "no". It's been some months
since then, bu
EFF's Secure Messaging Scorecard mentions Ggp4win,
I've added it here and also started with some comments
on their evaluation:
http://wiki.gnupg.org/press
--
www.intevation.de/~bernhard (CEO)www.fsfe.org (Founding GA Member)
Intevation GmbH, Osnabrück, Germany; Amtsgericht Osnabrück, HRB 1899
have you converted your keyring to pubring.kbx and moved away the old
pubring.gpg?
I started from a brand new install, right down to emptying out my old
%APPDATA%\Roaming\GnuPG directory. I reloaded keys the "hard" way, by
--import \path\to\old\pubring.gpg and --import \path\to\old\secring.gp
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 15:14, mailing-li...@asatiifm.net said:
> Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
> "_default_errsource", referenced from:
OS X ?
Such a problem has already bee posted today. I have no access to OS X
and thus can't help much.
Shalom-Salam,
Werner
--
Die Gedanken
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 15:01, m...@sandelman.ca said:
> Werner Koch wrote:
> > - All support for PGP-2 keys has been removed for security reasons.
>
> Does this mean that documents signed decades ago with PGP2 can no longer
> be verified?
Right. It is anyway useless because you have to assume
On Friday 31 October 2014 at 18:29:21, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> I agree that the FAQ is a bad place to present a chain of arguments and
> the wiki is the natural spot for it. My concern is that the FAQ and the
> wiki need to be kept in sync somehow, and I'm not going to be watching
> the wiki con
Yeah, OS X. I’m sorry, I’m sure this is drowning to all the discussion on this
thread, I didn’t think too much about the subject. I was replying to Nicholas’
reported issues with building on OS X. My aim was to expand on Nicholas’ report
with the info that it’s failing with that error yes, but b
At one point in the past there was discussion about 2.1 only allowing
one public keyring, but I don't see anything about that in the "What's
new" doc. Can I safely assume that 2.1 has support for multiple
keyrings in the same gpg.conf and/or command line?
Doug
___
Understood, Werner and Rob, thank you for the clarification. I'll try to
install a minimal version of GnuPG 2.1 and see how that works.
As always, the work of the GnuPG developers, maintainers, and supporters is
greatly appreciated!
Avi
User:Avraham
pub 3072D/F80E29F9 1/30/2009 Avi (Wiki
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 16:15, avi.w...@gmail.com said:
> I know that this has been discussed previously, but now that GnuPG modern
> has been released with ECC support, is there the intention to add that
> support to the classic build in the near-to-internediate future?
No. It would be too hard. I
On 06/11/14 17:45, Werner Koch wrote:
> In case your problem is the pinentry: The agent now provides a
> loopback pinentry option which basically brings back the version 1
> Pinentry prompts.
Perhaps this warrants a mention on the what's new FAQ page, for people
that are using 1.4 for that specifi
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 17:49, r...@sixdemonbag.org said:
> compels me to say that I'm running into a *lot* of problems with the
> Windows build. It does not appear to me to be ready for prime time.
That is why I wrote "is an experimental installer" ;-)
Shalom-Salam,
Werner
--
Die Gedanken s
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 18:12, dougb@dougbarton.email said:
> one public keyring, but I don't see anything about that in the "What's
> new" doc. Can I safely assume that 2.1 has support for multiple
> keyrings in the same gpg.conf and/or command line?
Yes, it should work. However, there are no test
On 11/6/14 10:28 AM, Werner Koch wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 18:12, dougb@dougbarton.email said:
one public keyring, but I don't see anything about that in the "What's
new" doc. Can I safely assume that 2.1 has support for multiple
keyrings in the same gpg.conf and/or command line?
Yes, it sh
That is why I wrote "is an experimental installer" ;-)
Sure, but even then -- this is a really shaky build, Werner. I'm
getting all different kinds of weird errors, from the keyserver helper
not being able to communicate with the outside world, to GnuPG swearing
it's created output but no ou
Hi guys,
I tried to compile 2.1.0 today and ran into an issue. I have the
latest autoconf/m4/gnu toolchain and all of the latest libraries that
GnuPG needs.
./confgure output looks OK to me and it has no complaints. You can see
the full output here: http://pastebin.com/YvTtXMed
But after I run m
You may not install "modern" (2.1) and "stable" (2.0) at the same
time. However, it is possible to install "classic" (1.4) along with
any of the other versions.
Is there any guidance as to how to install this on Fedora 20? gnupg2 is
a protected package there: it literally cannot be removed wit
Werner Koch wrote:
> - All support for PGP-2 keys has been removed for security reasons.
Does this mean that documents signed decades ago with PGP2 can no longer
be verified?
If so, I guess this is a reason to keep GPG classic around for verification
purposes only.
--
] Ne
Werner Koch wrote:
>> Werner Koch wrote: > - All support for PGP-2 keys has
>> been removed for security reasons.
>>
>> Does this mean that documents signed decades ago with PGP2 can no
>> longer be verified?
> Right. It is anyway useless because you have to assume tha
Some of this is probably on Enigmail; some of it is probably on Win32.
Ack -- I meant some of it is probably on GnuPG/Win32. :)
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 11/06/2014 04:09 PM, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 06/11/14 15:40, Werner Koch wrote:
>> OpenSSH has socket forwarding and that is what I was thinking
>> about.
>
> Sockets other than TCP you mean? Is this something generic that can
> be invoked by u
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 19:37, bigh...@gmail.com said:
> I tried to compile 2.1.0 today and ran into an issue. I have the
> latest autoconf/m4/gnu toolchain and all of the latest libraries that
> GnuPG needs.
It is kind of funny that GnuPG as most autoconf enabled programs build
fine on so many Unix
44 matches
Mail list logo
