Hi Sir
We are based on the "HDCP Signing Facility User's Guide" to apply public PGP
key,
but we could not find out like gpg.exe from the directory.
Could you help to ask any of shortcut to complete the public PGP key
application? Thanks!
Steven Tao
Jetway Infor
Hello,
I'm trying to decrypt a series of PGP files with GPG.
When I run the following command:
Gpg2 -batch -passphrase pass -o c:\temp\temp.txt -d c:\temp\file.pgp
I get the error:
gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 727A253D
gpg: decryption failed: No secret key
If I use PGP Zip wi
et key
C:\Users\me>
I am using the same keyring as PGP Desktop and I am able to decrypt the file
with that program.
Thanks for the help.
-- Steve
-Original Message-
From: Werner Koch [mailto:w...@gnupg.org]
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 5:51 AM
To: Steven Bonda
Cc: gnupg-users@
16, 2013 10:36 AM
To: Steven Bonda
Cc: gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Subject: Re: No secret key on 1 file
On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 14:56, sbo...@advance-medical.com said:
> gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 727A253D
> gpg: decryption failed: No secret key
Please check thenoutput of
gpg2 -v -K 727A253D
gnupg.org]
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 10:36 AM
To: Steven Bonda
Cc: gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Subject: Re: No secret key on 1 file
On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 14:56, sbo...@advance-medical.com said:
> gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 727A253D
> gpg: decryption failed: No secret key
Please chec
I am using gnupg via PHP's wrapper for it. I am sending an ecrypted
files to remote hosts, using two different keys for the respective
hosts. One host can decrypt the file properly, but the other host
cannot.
I am trying to troubleshoot this bug. Of course, I do not have the
private keys from the
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>
> 1. His correspondent said "use certificate 0xF1940956."
> 2. He did a gpg --recv-key 0xF1940956.
> 3. Quaero Corporation already has a certificate with the
> short ID of 0xF1940956 on the keyservers,
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Tue, 29 May 2012 19:54, lefevre...@osu.edu said:
>
>> This is, not surprisingly, the case. There was bad logic in my script
>> and somehow, somewhere, it's using the wrong key for this particular
>
> Speaking of scripts: Scripts should use
in GnuPG project then I'd be happy to be
referred to any 3rd party bits of software (even if commercial or
proprietary) that could?
I understand if the answer *should* be block-level encryption... but
they're intend on file-level.
--
Steven Maddox
Lantizia
__
hat
sooner.
--
Any other ideas welcome :)
To be honest I was kind of hoping someone would pop up an say there was
a PGP-compatible open source alternative kernel module that did the same
thing! Perhaps this was something the PGP guys kept closed source and
Symantec have continued to keep it that
just saving it
to a new local location :D
But I don't make the rules around here.
Steven Maddox
Lantizia
On 16/03/18 13:07, Phil Susi wrote:
> On 3/16/2018 4:11 AM, Steven Maddox wrote:
>> Yeah I just use LUKS on my PC to protect local files, but this is (as
>> above) for f
On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 10:10 PM wrote:
> Send Gnupg-users mailing list submissions to
> gnupg-users@gnupg.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'h
Hi all,
On 9 June 2020 I disclosed a vulnerability in fwupd. There was a problem with
the way that it used libgpgme to verify the PGP signature of its update
metadata.
I would like to put it forward for wider discussion: is libgpgme is working as
intended, or should this particular behaviour be c
Hi Werner,
Thanks for responding
> this is a requirement for OpenPGP because OpenPGP allows to embed a signature
> in encrypted data (combined method in contrast to the rarely used MIME
> containers). Thus when calling the decrypt function you can't know in
> advance whether there will be a sign
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Option 3 (no compression - OUCH!):
> --
> $ cd
> $ tar -cvf gnupg.tar -exclude random_seed ./.gnupg
> # copy gnupg.tar file to your home folder ...
> tar -xvf gnupg.tar
Just out of curiosity, is there something wrong
hi,
When one day my hardisk go bad and I can not access my keys, theose
files I encrypted for myself would never be opened for me. I don't
want that, then I believe I need to make a copy of my keys ( the whole
of ~/.gnugp directory, right? ). But where should I keep the copy?
It gets chance expo
Hi, list
I don't trust any electrical medium ( USB disk, DVD-R and so on ) as
backup copy of my keypairs. I think I want hardcopy of my keys. In
the user manual, however, I learned how to export/import public keys (
in armor mode ). but I don't see how to do the same on the private
key. Is it pos
Hi,
I searched through the manual but have not found commands which used
to export/import private key. The manual mentioned --export/--import
commands but they are likely used to export/import public keys. Am i
right?
Thanks.
--
woody
then sun rose thinly from the sea and the old man could se
It saddens me, but I have to agree. Raising interest around PGP encryption
is easy, but when it comes to actually using it, that's when people seem to
back off quickly. I'm not a developer, so have no idea what would be
required, but it seems to me that more focus is needed on making the
experien
In addition to explaining concepts, the biggest issue for me is simply the
steps one has to go through to get it working, steps that don't always
result in success. This seems especially problematic for Outlook users, I
have yet to find a free solution for Outlook that works reliably. And I do
tr
Hi,
Im trying to use the GpgOL plugin and am running into a hopefully solvable
issue. Essentially, I want to be able to send and sign Email, but when I do
this, the signature is always opaque. While I think I understand the reason
for using opaque, this essentially results in the message being
Hello everyone, I have a rather strange problem on which I could use some
advice. I am starting to use GnuPG again after a number of years and to
that end, have resurrected my original key generated with PGP back in 1998.
For the most part this key works well although since it's an older V3 key,
c
I'm having trouble finding a really suitable way to get GPG and Outlook 2013
working together and would really appreciate some help. I know of two
solutions and will outline the troubles I'm having with each below.
GpgOl plugin (included with gpg4win)
* Does not stay activated, I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm running Fedora 10 (if anyone cares) with gnupg2-2.0.10-1.fc10.i386.
I'm up and rolling, but I'd like to know more about configuring the agent.
I started the agent via the recommended incantation:
eval "$(gpg-agent --daemon)"
in my ~/.kde/Aut
On Thursday, May 7th 2009 at 02:45 -, quoth Robert J. Hansen:
=>gpg2.20.mani...@dfgh.net wrote:
=>> How to import a key pair (my own secret and public keys) from GPG 1.4.9
=>> to PGP 6.5 ?
=>
=>This is generally not worth doing. It can be done, but it is not
=>recommended.
=>
=>Is there any p
On Friday, May 8th 2009 at 17:30 -, quoth Coffman, Beth C:
=>What is a good way to write a C++ app to decrypt multiple
=>large PGP-encrypted files simultaneously into memory? I cannot have
=>the plaintext output in a file on disk at any time. Preferably, one block
=>of data from the file wil
On Saturday, May 16th 2009 at 23:40 -, quoth David Shaw:
=>On May 16, 2009, at 9:14 PM, Lucio Capuani wrote:
=>
=>> > Can anyone explain why there is a difference between signing and
=>> > encrypting keypairs, even for the same type (RSA)?
=>>
=>> As far as I've understood from the documentat
On Wednesday, May 20th 2009 at 15:00 -, quoth mike _:
=>I have an account, bob, on a machine that is used for building rpms
=>and then creating and signing a repository.
=>
=>If I log in to the machine as bob via ssh and run
=>
=>$ gpg -a --detach-sign somedir/repodata/repomd.xml
=>
=>then all
On Wednesday, May 20th 2009 at 17:36 -, quoth Chris Babcock:
=>On Wed, 20 May 2009 20:00:42 +0100
=>mike _ wrote:
=>
=>> Can anyone offer any insight in this issue?
=>
=>http://www.joshstaiger.org/archives/2005/07/bash_profile_vs.html
=>
=>In .bash_profile, you will have something *like* this
On Tuesday, May 26th 2009 at 23:38 -, quoth John Clizbe:
=>Faramir wrote:
=>> Hello,
=>> I saw a question in the support list in Spanish language, and it is
=>> about how to sign files inside a folder, in Windows OS, without using
=>> additional tools. The goal is to have a tree of folders
On Saturday, May 30th 2009 at 16:58 -, quoth Roger:
Is there a method to avoid using pinentry-gtk-2 when using a console
within X and specify using pinentry or pinentry-curses?
I've already tried recompiling gnupg & pinentry (using -gtk -qt3). :-/
This bugs me because I'm working on the c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
There's a pgp concept that I'm not comfortable with. It has to do with the
difference between owner trust and key validity. And I say comfortable, not
because I don't like it or that I don't think it doesn't work; I just don't
feel like I understand it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I see that there are some people who send their messages (especially to this
list) with their messages signed via an attached signature. I can't imagine
that this question hasn't been asked before, but is there an advantage to
doing this vs having an i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/22/09 22:25, quoth Joe Korn:
> Hi Harry,
>
> We ran into the same problem and the only way we were able to get around it
> was by storing the pass phrase in a file and using the TYPE command instead
> of the echo. Curious to see if anyone else
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/24/09 02:56, quoth littleBrain:
> Hi All,
>
> I am newbie to GPG.
> I have got an application where it uses the following command to decrypt GPG
> encrypted messages.
>
> /usr/local/bin/gpg --no-tty --passphrase-fd 0 -d /tmp/testXX.gpg
took the message and put it in its own file and re-ran the command:
/usr/bin/gpg2 --charset utf8 --batch --no-tty --status-fd 2 -d \
--use-agent < msg
Here's the output:
[GNUPG:] ENC_TO 365AF334C8DCF2FD 16 0
[GNUPG:] USERID_HINT 365AF334C8DCF2FD Steven W. Orr
[GNUPG:] NEED_PA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/01/09 15:01, quoth Steven W. Orr:
> I got my friend to install WinPT which seems to include GnuPG. He created his
> keypair. He received my key and signed my key. He sent me my key back and he
> also sent me his key which I then signed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/11/09 12:04, quoth Jason Locklin:
>> Timestamp: Tuesday 11 Aug 2009, 11:31 --400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
>
> I would avoid OpenDNS as they break a lot of stuff. If your ISP DNS
> servers are down, I would suggest emailing them.
>
> For now, t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/13/09 09:41, quoth the dragon:
> If you're in control of the computer the files reside on, and were in
> control of it when the files were created and last accessed, the chances
> that you *don't* know the key for the encryption is so slim as to
.) I'm using
gpg2/Thunderbird/Enigmail and I sent a message to an address which then
forwards back to me. Here's the structure I see when it comes back:
From: "Steven W. Orr"
Organization: SysLang
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: li...@t
Ismael Valladolid Torres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> gpg: keyserver send failed: general error
Are you running a virus scanner on this computer? If so, try disabling
it temporarily and running the send-keys operation again.
--
Steven
Werner Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, the X prefix is not anymore required for user defined headers.
Was there some change in this prescription? If so, from where? I hadn't
heard about "X-" falling from use.
--
Steven E. Harris
_
the deployment of that header.
Right, and you're usually obligated to then support two headers: the
experimental one, and the standardized one, which may have changed from
the experimental one by way of "standardization" going beyond canonizing
existing p
Werner Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My conclusion is that X- was never required by the standard and that
> after the 19 years the IETF realized that there was no need for it.
Thank you for the detailed explanation.
--
Stev
"Oskar L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yahoo! has a nice free service called AddressGuard.
[...]
Spamgourmet¹ has offered this and more since October 2000.
Footnotes:
¹ http://www.spamgourmet.com/
--
Steven E. Harris
___
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 4/11/13 4:13 AM, gnupg-users-requ...@gnupg.org wrote:
> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:05:46 +0930 From: Ashley Holman
> To: gnupg-users@gnupg.org Subject: Backing up
> Private Keys Message-ID:
>
>
>
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello GNU Privacy Guard Users:
I typically only use GNU/Linux machines, but recently decided to go
pragmatic due to issues with interacting with data and tools that
other collaborators of mine tend to use. So I broke down my stern
resolve and bought
Windows 7 home premium
service pack 1
8 gb of ram
64-bit
GnuPG 1.4.23
GPG Config 1.33
GPG Shell 3.78
I started using PGP about 30 years go, mostly out of an academic interest. I
had (and still have) no real need to ecrypt my email. But, I found very
quickly
that I liked using it to encrypt i
48 matches
Mail list logo
