On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 04:18, r...@sixdemonbag.org said:
> And the MIME attachment being mangled by the mailing list, yes, I agree.
> It's almost a bizarre endorsement of the attachment fragility idea...
Which is a long standing problem of the Python mail library. Mailpile
also had its trouble wit
On 13-02-2015 1:44, Jerry wrote:
> Inline totally destroys a "sig delimiter"
It is supposed to sign and/or encrypt the sig too.
> and adds a lot of useless garbage to the message body.
You need a mailclient to interpret that. Mail clients interprete Mime
attachments too (or not).
--
ir. J.C.
Hello,
You need to emulate an OpenPGP via Host Card Emulation.
You can get necessary parts from here:
1. OpenPGP applet. Try this: https://github.com/Yubico/ykneo-openpgp
or This: https://github.com/martinpaljak/AppletPlayground
2. Emulator for running the applet code in Android:
https://github.
Hi Xavier,
Am 12.02.2015 um 23:46 schrieb Xavier Maillard:
> Hello,
sorry, just to inform you that I cannot verify your signature:
While trying to verify it, Enigmail (German localization) reports the following:
Enigmail-Sicherheitsinfo:
Fehler - Überprüfung der Unterschrift fehlgeschlagen
Öffe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Friday 13 February 2015 at 10:19:06 AM, in
, Johan Wevers wrote:
> On 13-02-2015 1:44, Jerry wrote:
>> Inline totally destroys a "sig delimiter"
In an OpenPGP-aware mail client, that is the decision of the
developer. For example, is ther
des-apare.cido...@autistici.org writes:
>> Maybe I cannot offer a big rule for THE preferred way. Jerry is
>> right, but maybe we HAVE to deal with recipients who have no
>> influence to take a mail client which is capable to handle PGP/MIME
>> sigbatures properly. Then it is also MY problem.
>
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Thursday 12 February 2015 at 10:46:33 PM, in
, Xavier Maillard wrote:
> in my quest of the perfect setup, I am asking myself
> what is the prefered way to sign a message: inline
> (like this one) or using a MIME header ?
My preference is Inli
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Thursday 12 February 2015 at 12:26:57 PM, in
, Werner Koch wrote:
> Nope. You will never find a secring.kbc. 2.1 uses
> secring.gpg only in this ways:
> If secring.gpg exists and the file .gpg-v21-migrated
> does not exist, the secret keys
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 12:22:23 +, MFPA stated:
> My preference is Inline: I want everything right there in the message
> body where I can see it.
Exactly what is it you feel the over powering urge to see?
--
Jerry
pgpDjGfOstW1Q.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
My personal preference is inline, but I
do have a request: if you have a 4096
bit RSA key, please don't sign inline. The signature block is ridiculously
long. That's why I use DSA and
especially ed25519 for signing.
My main email access is on my
pho
On 2015-02-13 15:07, Brian Minton wrote:
if you have a 4096 bit RSA key, please dont sign inline. The
signature block is
ridiculously long.
You'll find it is actually even an 8192 bit RSA key.
Peter.
--
I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail.
You can send me encrypt
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 11:46:33PM +0100, Xavier Maillard wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Hello,
>
> in my quest of the perfect setup, I am asking myself what is the
> prefered way to sign a message: inline (like this one) or using a MIME header
> ?
>
> Is there a
Werner,
congratulations on getting 2.1.2 released!
Also congratulations to all people in the GnuPG-Initiative
for the funding success that we all had in the last weeks.
Yes, Werner gets the funding, but I consider it a success
of all people that actively contribute to GnuPG!
On Wednesday 11 Febr
On 2/12/2015 at 5:42 PM, "Xavier Maillard" wrote:
>
>Hello,
>
>in my quest of the perfect setup, I am asking myself what is the
>prefered way to sign a message: inline (like this one) or using a
>MIME header ?
=
If, by 'perfect', you mean that it's as close to possible to not be mangled,
a
> On 13 Feb 2015, at 08:25, Christopher W. Richardson
> wrote:
>
> FWIW, Mac Mail marked this message as spam. Not sure if it universally does
> that for all inline sigs, but ... FYI.
>
> Chris
Fortunately it certainly does not.
--
Ville
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with Open
On 13-02-2015 16:44, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> Some people will complain if you use one format, and others will
> complain if you use the other, so unless there's someone you
> especially want to favor (or annoy) you may as well send what you
> would most like to receive. (Isn't there some sort of Go
On Fri 2015-02-13 07:38:09 -0500, MFPA wrote:
> Thanks for the correction. I was confusing secret and public keyring
> files.
I don't think gpg 2.1 will use any pubring.gpg if pubring.kbx exists,
though.
gpg2 --list-keys for me looks at /home/dkg/.gnupg/pubring.kbx even
though /home/dkg/.gnupg/pu
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 16:26, bernh...@intevation.de said:
>> What's New in GnuPG-2.1
>
> This was ment to read GnuPG-2.1.2 I guess, because of
No, this describes what is new in the 2.1 branch. 2.1.2 is basically a
bug fix release.
> clarified it. Again I think you or we as an initiative should w
> Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_principle
It's worth noting that Postel (the guy who first formulated it) was very
dissatisfied with how people tended to interpret Postel's Law. Per him,
he felt most people who quoted
On 2/13/15 4:01 AM, MFPA wrote:
In an OpenPGP-aware mail client, that is the decision of the
developer. For example, is there any huge reason why it would be a bad
idea to treat the same as they
treat ?
And Enigmail, for example, can do exactly that. :)
Doug
On Wed 2015-02-11 16:35:27 -0500, Philip Jackson wrote:
> If I do gpg2 --version, it comes back clearly with 2.0.26. and enigmail
> clearly
> indicates that it has found the gpg2 that I built.
>
> So, moving on, if I do :
>
> apt-get -t experimental install gnupg2
>
> will I get 2.1.1 installed t
Peter Lebbing writes:
> On 2015-02-13 15:07, Brian Minton wrote:
>> if you have a 4096 bit RSA key, please dont sign inline. The
>> signature block is
>> ridiculously long.
>
> You'll find it is actually even an 8192 bit RSA key.
Yes sorry. I should add a smaller key for that purpose ...
Regar
On 13-02-2015 20:41, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> It's worth noting that Postel (the guy who first formulated it) was very
> dissatisfied with how people tended to interpret Postel's Law.
I think Godwin is even more dissatisfied. :-)
> This has long been one of my complaints about the way GnuPG get
When generating a uid for a key using gpg2 (2.0.25), and attempting to
input an email address containing a tilde (~), I receive an invalid
email error. There seems to be no way I can find to bypass this
restriction, and use my "invalid" email.
Such characters can be used in i2bote addresses, and
On Wed 2015-02-11 17:31:42 -0500, Xavier Maillard wrote:
> Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes:
>
>> The fact that you're using a FAT volume is the root cause here; FAT
>> filesystems do not have ownership or permissions, so when a modern OS
>> mounts them, it has to fake permissions for these files.
>
> T
On Thu 2014-12-04 03:23:52 -0500, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2014 18:35, m...@monaco.cx said:
>> Does anyone have gpg-agent forwarding working with SSH's recent generic
>> socket
>> forwarding? Does it still require socat on one end, because I've only been
>> able
>> to specify a socket
> FAT, alas, is the portable filesystem that you're looking for.
NTFS also works. Linux can read/write NTFS through NTFS-3G and FUSE,
and a port exists for OS X as well. And yes, the stack is 100% libre. :)
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
The wikipedia article on UDF mentions write support in all major OSes.
It also supports POSIX permissions.
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 9:49 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> FAT, alas, is the portable filesystem that you're looking for.
>
> NTFS also works. Linux can read/write NTFS through NTFS-3G and
On Fri 2015-02-13 19:54:44 -0500,
bm-2ctjsegdfzqngqwuqjswro6jrwlc9b3...@bitmessage.ch wrote:
> When generating a uid for a key using gpg2 (2.0.25), and attempting to
> input an email address containing a tilde (~), I receive an invalid
> email error. There seems to be no way I can find to bypass t
29 matches
Mail list logo
