On Oct 23, 2017, at 12:27 PM, Peter Palfrader wrote:
>
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, David Shaw wrote:
>
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> I've added support for EdDSA to paperkey (it's a one-line fix - EdDSA and
>> ECDSA have the same representation), so that's simp
Hi Peter,
I've added support for EdDSA to paperkey (it's a one-line fix - EdDSA and ECDSA
have the same representation), so that's simple enough.
The segfault is more troubling though - not supporting an algorithm (yet) is
one thing, but paperkey should never segfault. Unfortunately, I can't
On Oct 7, 2013, at 6:52 AM, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.12-7+deb7u1
>
> My current GPG key was created in 2009 and very shortly afterwards I
> changed the digest preferences as explained here:
>
> http://www.debian-administration.org/users/dkg/weblog/48
>
> and reuploa
On Feb 14, 2012, at 12:37 PM, Luca Capello wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.11-3
> Severity: normal
> File: /usr/bin/gpg
> Usertags: pca.it-communication
>
> Hi there!
>
> I was importing some keys after the FOSDEM 2012 Keysigning Party and
> here a strange result:
> =
> $ gpg --recv-k
On Aug 20, 2010, at 12:51 PM, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 20.08.2010, 14:10 +0530 schrieb Y Giridhar Appaji Nag:
>
>> I use a "list-options show-photos" in my gpg.conf and also have a photo as a
>> UID in my secret keys. I use "display" from the imagemagick package to view
>> photo U
On Oct 14, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Peter Palfrader wrote:
Hi David,
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
When paperkey is given the -o flag and the output file doesn't
already
exist, it is created with normal permissions - (644). This is
clearly
bad. It would be OK to just mention in th
On Oct 14, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Peter Palfrader wrote:
Hi David,
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
When paperkey is given the -o flag and the output file doesn't
already
exist, it is created with normal permissions - (644). This is
clearly
bad. It would be OK to just mention in th
On Sep 6, 2009, at 3:47 AM, Andreas Metzler wrote:
#2 Get rid of gnupg's dependency on libcurl3-gnutls. This seems to
require quite a bit of effort. If gnupg is built with curl support it
is using curl even for hkp keyservers. You could perhapsr build gnupg
twice (once to get a gpgkeys_hkp witho
On Aug 5, 2009, at 1:35 PM, Olivier Berger wrote:
Package: gnupg
Version: 1.4.9-4
Severity: normal
It seems that neither :
$ gpg --gen-key --secret-keyring /media/whatever/.gnupg-secret/
secring.gpg
nor
$ gpg --secret-keyring /media/whatever/.gnupg-secret/secring.gpg --
gen-key
allow to ge
On Jul 13, 2009, at 7:42 AM, Simon Richter wrote:
Package: gnupg
Version: 1.4.9-4
Severity: normal
Hi,
attempting to use any hash other than SHA1 fails:
gpg: detected reader `Towitoko Chipdrive Reader 00 00'
gpg: card does not support digest algorithm SHA256
gpg: signing failed: invalid argum
On May 22, 2009, at 12:23 PM, Daniel Leidert wrote:
Hi,
I think this problem will be solved by building gnupg against
libcurl*,
which passes "Pragma: no-cache" automatically (and as far as I see,
this is not overwritten by gnupg).
This is true, but I think it's reasonable behavior for GPG'
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 01:17:08PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On 03/12/2009 12:33 AM, David Shaw wrote:
>
> > As the author of that patch, let me request that you - please - don't
> > adopt it just yet. To be sure, the feature is coming, but the exact
> >
On Mar 11, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Micah Anderson wrote:
Package: gnupg
Version: 1.4.9-5
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Hello,
There is a move towards providing keyserver queries over an encrypted
transport for the purposes of stopping the leakage of key query
information that could be used for tra
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 04:08:15PM -0400, Stephen Depooter wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.9-3
> Severity: serious
> Justification: no longer builds from source
>
> When either libcurl4-gnutls-dev or libcurl4-openssl-dev is installed, the
> gnupg package detects a system libcurl and uses i
On Jul 28, 2008, at 5:00 PM, Michelle Konzack wrote:
Hello David,
Am 2008-07-28 11:39:00, schrieb David Shaw:
Agreed that it isn't GPG's job to rewrite addresses, but that said,
GPG does actually have the feature that was requested:
keyserver mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]@example.com
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 05:06:42PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > What's happening is actually pretty normal. hostname -f or /etc/mailname
> > is picked up as the hostname value for the sender From: and probably
> > also for envelope From: and thus most receiving mailserver will reject
On Apr 30, 2008, at 10:05 AM, Daniel Leidert wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 30.04.2008, 09:56 -0400 schrieb David Shaw:
Hi Colin,
I just used your manpage and completed and (hopefully) improved it a
bit. It is directly written in GROFF. Attached the result (for those
trying to get on top of gnupg
On Apr 30, 2008, at 9:31 AM, Daniel Leidert wrote:
Hi Colin,
I just used your manpage and completed and (hopefully) improved it a
bit. It is directly written in GROFF. Attached the result (for those
trying to get on top of gnupg).
With your permission, I'd like to include this man page in th
On Apr 6, 2008, at 11:20 AM, Ralph Janke wrote:
Package: gnupg
Version: 1.4.6-2
Severity: wishlist
Reported by Miguel Ruiz at Ubuntu
(https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnupg/+bug/83534)
In previous version, gnupg showed a success message; now only shows:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ gpg --send
On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 06:28:50PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.6-2
> Severity: normal
>
> I haven't used gpg much in the last 6 months, and therefore have not
> used --check-trustdb for a while. Now today:
>
> $ gpg --check-trustdb
> gpg: 3 marginal(s) needed, 1 com
On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 05:21:39PM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> Package: paperkey
> Version: 0.7-1
> Severity: serious
>
> Hi David,
>
> As can be seen at [0] paperkey fails to build from source on sparc[1].
> The testsuite fails due to unaligned memory access in sha1_read_ctx.
Interesting.
On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 05:57:06PM +0200, Rémi Laurent wrote:
> $ gpg
> gpg: directory `/home/foobar/.gnupg' created
> gpg: keyring `/home/foobar/.gnupg/secring.gpg' created
> gpg: keyring `/home/foobar/.gnupg/pubring.gpg' created
>
> # Getting Peter Palfrader key
> $ gpg --keyserver pgp.surfnet.
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 12:10:08PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.6-2
> Severity: important
>
> --decrypt-files only decrypts the first file and fails on all following files:
>
> piper:/tmp/cdt.OVV16466> date > a
>
On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 12:24:48AM +0200, Markus Järvinen wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.5-2
> Severity: normal
>
> If I understand correctly, "gpg --no-options" is supposed to ignore
> ~/.gnupg completely. However I get the following errors when using it:
>
> $ echo foo | gpg -c --no-opt
On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 01:21:19PM +0100, Paul Walker wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 06:50:06PM -0400, David Shaw wrote:
>
> > At least on Linux, mutt can do the right thing with storing
> > passphrases securely. This may be true on other systems as well, but
> > I can
Earlier in this bug it was stated that a process must be root to
mlock() memory under Linux. That was true back then (this is a
long-lived bug), but it is no longer true in more modern kernels.
These days, any process can mlock() however much memory the user
chooses to allow it to lock (set via ul
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 11:37:49AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Werner Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.21.1045 +0100]:
> > 28203 rt_sigaction(SIGINT, {SIG_DFL}, NULL, 8) = 0
> > 28203 unlink("/home/madduck/.gnupg/pubring.gpg.lock") = 0
> > 28203 unlink("/home/madduck/.gnupg/.#lk0x8
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 03:18:50PM -0700, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> PS. I was off-line when I filed this, but now I notice that this has
> been discussed. One message [1] suggests that this is a spec violation
> by gnupg.
>
> Andrew
>
> [1] http://www.imc.org/ietf-openpgp/mail-archive/msg12809.htm
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 03:16:21PM -0700, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 11:18:04AM -0400, David Shaw wrote:
> > This is not a bug. Clearsigned messages are not reversible to restore
> > the original message including line endings and trailing whitespace.
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 10:55:51PM -0700, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.2.2-1
> Severity: normal
>
> Messages clearsigned and then "decrypted" may not return the original
> message. In particular, a newline may be added.
>
> % echo -n hello > out
> % ls -l out
>
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 07:48:35PM +0100, Daniel R. wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.2-2
> Severity: important
>
>
> This bug comes after investigation of another bug
> report for seahorse, see the following reference:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=351347
>
> Apparent
On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 06:28:50PM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.2-2
> Priority: wishlist
>
> There are some MUAs (like mutt) that do not encrypt mails you send with your
> own key, which makes them unreadable to you once stored in a folder. Since
> t
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 07:53:20AM +0200, Romain Francoise wrote:
> David Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Please try the attached patch to 1.4.2.
>
> This patch fixes the problem. Thanks.
Good. That patch is part of 1.4.3.
David
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 11:39:41AM +0200, Romain Francoise wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.2-1
> Severity: normal
>
> (I sent this report a few days ago but didn't get an ack from [EMAIL
> PROTECTED])
>
> The new version of GnuPG doesn't like my keyring:
>
> pacem:/tmp$ gpg --check-trust
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 12:31:35AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> > That did the trick indeed.
>
> So this bug can now be closed?
I would say so.
David
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 12:32:31AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> > > Yes it is. Can you try this patch? If it works well, I'll put it
> > > into 1.4.1.
> >
> > This seems to work yes.
>
> Has it been included in 1.4.1? If that's the case this bugreport can be
> closed.
It was included in 1.
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 12:48:01AM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.0-1
>
> When updating keys that use the prefered keyserver field with
> --refresh-keys gpg will use that server to get the keys. It
> will however update the trustdb after it updated such keys and
> befor
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 03:13:00AM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 07:51:07PM -0500, David Shaw wrote:
> >
> > Please try the 1.4.1 release candidate from
> >
> > ftp://ftp.gnupg.org/gcrypt/alpha/gnupg/gnupg-1.4.1rc1.tar.bz2
> > and
>
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 01:10:06AM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Package: gnupg
> Version: 1.4.0-1
> Severity: important
>
> Hi,
>
> When calling gpg --refresh-keys on a large keyring it only gets
> about 1000 keys from it and then stops with:
> gpgkeys: HKP fetch error: eof
> ?: subkeys.pgp.net: H
39 matches
Mail list logo
