On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 19:27:40 +, Holger Wansing
wrote:
>I am unable to clearsign a file with gpg, always getting
>permission denied errors.
>However it does not tell me which is the file where permissions
>are missing.
>I checked all files I am aware of:
>- the file to sign,
>- all files in .gn
On Thu, 09 Aug 2018 at 23:58:22 +0200, Holger Wansing wrote:
> Yes! That's was exactly the problem: using gpg inside of su -.
Note that if you are trying to protect your key material from a
possibly-compromised main user account, switching from the main account
to the keyring account with su is no
Hi,
"W. Martin Borgert" wrote:
> On 2018-08-09 19:27, Holger Wansing wrote:
> > I am unable to clearsign a file with gpg, always getting
> > permission denied errors.
>
> Maybe https://bugs.debian.org/836772 or similar?
Yes! That's was exactly the problem: using gpg inside of su -.
Thanks for
On 2018-08-09 19:27, Holger Wansing wrote:
> I am unable to clearsign a file with gpg, always getting
> permission denied errors.
Maybe https://bugs.debian.org/836772 or similar?
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 09:28:40AM -, Francesco Namuri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have become DD in last days, in all my NM process, and in all my debian
> work I used only my first and last name, my doubt is related to my second
> name. I use it only on official/buroccratic documents.
>
> Now I've c
As spanish, I have two surnames as well. I'll just keep on using the first one
online, like anyone else. It gives us a bit more privacy :-)
Cheers.
Francesco Namuri wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I have become DD in last days, in all my NM process, and in all my
>debian
>work I used only my first and last nam
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 09:30:52AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> Would subkeys help in this scenario? (hint hint, some good docs about
> real-world subkey usage are needed).
Subkeys cannot (to my knowledge) be used for certification (i.e. key signing).
At least not with stock gnupg.
Kind regards,
Phi
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 08:52:20PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> Additional metadata, e.g. number and expiration date would
> be helpful.
Actually that'd be illegal in Germany -- ID numbers of identification
documents may not be stored in databases, with exactly two exceptions:
- the issuing
In article <20090624003554.gf9...@kunpuu.plessy.org> you wrote:
> that would be very welcome. This whole discussion confuses me and I do not
> understand if Debian as a project accepts signatures that are not based on a
> passport or an ID card. For instance, I have used drivers licenses or social
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 3:14 AM, Daniel Kahn
Gillmor wrote:
> I think that misses a critical point; i want to use my OpenPGP key for a
> variety of purposes both in and out of debian. I consider it a baseline
> tool for managing my digital identity. While i'm happy to obey
> debian-specific guid
Le Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 08:52:20PM +0200, martin f krafft a écrit :
>
> On the other hand, just some clear guidelines that participants HAVE
> TO abide by, would help, e.g. a commitment to a signing policy for
> all keys that are to appear in a Debian keyring.
Hi Martin,
that would be very welco
On 06/23/2009 02:52 PM, martin f krafft wrote:
> Additional metadata, e.g. number and expiration date would
> be helpful.
This would certainly be useful from the smiting perspective, but might
raise privacy concerns if people don't want their passport number (or
whatever) bound to their OpenPGP ke
also sprach Daniel Kahn Gillmor [2009.06.23.1949
+0200]:
> --> govt-iss...@wot.debian.org might be a distinguished name
> identifying the apparent issuer of any validated identification,
> such as /C=US/ST=NY/ for a NY State (USA) driver's license and
> /C=US/ for an American passport. If you che
On 06/23/2009 12:34 PM, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Frankly, recording the details of the verification performed is
> a first step to improving the ability to assess the strength of the
> link in the web of trust. A simple key sig is not enough, there could
> be a formal process to add to
On 4/29/06, Tamas SZERB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
all replies tries to tell me that I'm intend to crack the GPG. Believe
me, If I could do it, I would not use it anymore since it's not safe
enough.
Err, the password is not an unchangable part of the key. You are in
the perfect condition to att
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 09:14:12AM +0200, Tamas SZERB wrote:
>So I would be more curious what could be the standard way to resolve
>this issue asap.
Please read http://keyring.debian.org/replacing_keys.html
Aníbal Monsalve Salazar
--
http://v7w.com/anibal
signature.asc
Description: Digital sig
all replies tries to tell me that I'm intend to crack the GPG. Believe
me, If I could do it, I would not use it anymore since it's not safe
enough.
Anyway, at least, I resolved the upgrade from 1024 to more bits, but I
loose my signatures unfortunately. :(
So I would be more curious what could b
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 04:50:23PM +0200, Tamas SZERB wrote:
> Hey Guys, could you CC-me if you continue the thread,
>
> Could you tell me what to do if it seems I just forgot my passphrase
> for my GPG key, and it blocks me to upload/fix my outstanding bugs on
> different packages?
You can try t
Re: Jason D. Clinton 2006-04-28 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In short, your key is gone and with the current long delays in getting new
> keys added to the keyring, that's a big problem. You can't recover a GPG
> password.
If you had read the keyring.d.o changelog you would have seen that
these long de
Hi Tamas!
You wrote:
> Could you tell me what to do if it seems I just forgot my passphrase
> for my GPG key, and it blocks me to upload/fix my outstanding bugs on
> different packages?
Well, upload your revocation cert, en get a new key signed...
--
Kind regards,
+
On Friday 28 April 2006 09:50, Tamas SZERB wrote:
> Hey Guys, could you CC-me if you continue the thread,
>
> Could you tell me what to do if it seems I just forgot my passphrase
> for my GPG key, and it blocks me to upload/fix my outstanding bugs on
> different packages?
In short, your key is gon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andreas Metzler wrote:
> - I personally always run dpkg-buildpackage with -uc -us and use
> debsign -kkeyid foo_changes to sign the /final/ packages
> afterwards. I usually build the packages more than once before
> uploading as I often find som
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andreas Metzler wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Dear experts,
>>I am trying to build my own debian packages with GPG signature. I set
>> up gnupg, ran gpg and gpg --gen-key and also filled the variable
>> default-key with my generated keyID
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Dear experts,
>I am trying to build my own debian packages with GPG signature. I set
> up gnupg, ran gpg and gpg --gen-key and also filled the variable
> default-key with my generated keyID in ~/.gnupg/gpg.conf. I thought that
> this is all I have to do, since Debi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 10:19:33AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>
>> dpkg-deb: building package `sshguard' in `../sshguard_1.0.0-4_all.deb'.
>> signfile sshguard_1.0.0-4.dsc
>> gpg: skipped "Tomas Davidek <[EMA
On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 10:19:33AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> dpkg-deb: building package `sshguard' in `../sshguard_1.0.0-4_all.deb'.
> signfile sshguard_1.0.0-4.dsc
> gpg: skipped "Tomas Davidek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>": secret key not
> available
> gpg: [stdin]: clearsign failed:
Quoting John Walther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> If any Debian developers or prospective developers would like to have
> their GPG keys signed, I will probably be in Bangalore next month.
>
> The keysigning will probably be at the Bangalore LUG meeting, but other
> arrangements can be made. Email me.
On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 14:42 -0700, mina fahmy wrote:
> Are there any Debian developers in the Egypt, area?
Those two are returned when querying db.debian.org for people in Egypt:
* Ayman Negm ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
* Muhammad Hussain Yusuf ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
You have to contact them directly to re
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 02:14:10PM -0700, Allyn, MarkX A wrote:
> Are there any Debian developers in the Portland, Oregon area?
Yep, plenty of us.
> I need to have my GPG key signed in order to become a Debian developer.
> I found one person at Intel who had his key signed by a Debian
> develop
On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 23:27 +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
> The only *listed* offers for Oregon are:
>
> OR, Bend: Nick Rusnov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> OR, Medford: Sam Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> but I'm not familiar enough with US geography to know if that's close
> enough.
Those are quite a
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 02:14:10PM -0700, Allyn, MarkX A wrote:
> Hello:
>
> Are there any Debian developers in the Portland, Oregon area?
>
> I need to have my GPG key signed in order to become a Debian developer.
>
> I found one person at Intel who had his key signed by a Debian
> developer.
On Nov 29, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>from the current packager i had to hear that it's largely unstable.
>many bugs and such. we'll have to wait...
I have been using it for weeks without any problem, so I'd say it should
be packaged. (No, I'm not going to do it.)
--
ciao,
Mar
also sprach Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.11.29.1722 +0100]:
> Oh, so it is a running gpg instance with key, and running gpg just
> passes it data. That makes sense. Someone package it, please! :-)
from the current packager i had to hear that it's largely unstable.
many bugs and such. we'll
Brian May wrote:
> I would hope that gpg-agent follows similar principles...
Oh, so it is a running gpg instance with key, and running gpg just
passes it data. That makes sense. Someone package it, please! :-)
--
see shy jo
pgpbjjlMuKoy1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 10:41:29PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> That would still let root replace /usr/bin/gpg with such a program
> though. So something like this is of some value, but only manages to
> narrow the window that lets someone who has temporary access to, say, a
> laptop with an agent run
Andreas Fuchs wrote:
> I find it interesting that you point this out, because I was just
> wondering wether it would be possible to just open(2) the file
> /usr/bin/gpg and exec(2) this file via the file descriptor from this
> open(2) calland not the path name.
Yeah, you could do that (on linux an
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 22:41:29 EST, Joey Hess writes:
>q-agent is a PITA to get working with stuff like mutt though, so I do
>look forward to using gpg-agent.
What for? signing/encrypting stuff? if so, maybe have a look at kuvert.
>I just think I'd guard my laptop with
>my mail signing key on it
On 2002-11-27, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That would still let root replace /usr/bin/gpg with such a program
> though. So something like this is of some value, but only manages to
> narrow the window that lets someone who has temporary access to, say,
> a laptop with an agent running an
also sprach Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.11.28.0441 +0100]:
> By this I assume you mean it does something like store the passphrase in
> non-swappable memory and then when requested use some form of IPC to
> feed it into a /usr/bin/gpg process. I assume it hardcodes the path,
> which would p
martin f krafft wrote:
> from what i understood. gpg-agent hooks into gpg like ssh-agent into
> ssh and you can't get at the passphrase. correct me if this is wrong.
By this I assume you mean it does something like store the passphrase in
non-swappable memory and then when requested use some form
also sprach Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.11.27.2317 +0100]:
> What is the security model of each, and why is one better then
> the other?
quintuple-agent simply echoes the passphrase onto fd0, to be picked up
by another program through a piper.
qagent get gpg | cat
or so reveals your pa
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 06:22:55PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> > Have you looked at quintuple-agent?
>
> it's a horrible security threat. i am not going to give my GPG
> passphrase to that thing! i've heard that gpg-agent can do better...
What is the security model of each, and why is one bet
On Nov 27, Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> where can i find gpg-agent? is it packaged for debian? if not, then
>> i'll file an ITP unless someone has valid things to say against that.
>Have you looked at quintuple-agent?
Yes, it does not work well.
--
ciao,
Marco
pgpJEumUmpXWb.p
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 11:54:56AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 09:19, martin f krafft wrote:
> > where can i find gpg-agent? is it packaged for debian? if not, then
> > i'll file an ITP unless someone has valid things to say against that.
>
> Have you looked at quintuple-ag
also sprach Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.11.27.1754 +0100]:
> > where can i find gpg-agent? is it packaged for debian? if not, then
> > i'll file an ITP unless someone has valid things to say against that.
>
> Have you looked at quintuple-agent?
it's a horrible security threat. i am no
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 09:19, martin f krafft wrote:
> where can i find gpg-agent? is it packaged for debian? if not, then
> i'll file an ITP unless someone has valid things to say against that.
Have you looked at quintuple-agent?
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 03:19:37PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> where can i find gpg-agent? is it packaged for debian? if not, then
> i'll file an ITP unless someone has valid things to say against that.
there are packages by Marcus Brinkmann on ftp.gnupg.org, and I'm working
on adapting those
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 03:19:37PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> where can i find gpg-agent? is it packaged for debian? if not, then
> i'll file an ITP unless someone has valid things to say against that.
I believe, the only one is available in newpg package (not Debian),
which, I think, is the n
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 08:17:09PM +0100, Thorsten Sauter wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi,
> don't know if anyone has noticed, but the qa.debian.org/developer.php
> doesn't found any gpg keys from public keyservers.
>
> It always report: GPG key id not found!
>
> Seems to be a problem after the move of sat
HI Thorsten,
Thorsten Sauter wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> hmm. maybe we misunderstand us :)
Uups, yes. The second time I read your message I replied to I see.
Misread your sentence.
Sorry.
Regards,
Rene
--
.''`. Rene Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://
Hello,
hmm. maybe we misunderstand us :)
> No, you defenitely are _not_ in the Debian keyring.
I'm *not* in the debian keyring, but before the century crash :), my gpg key
was find by qa because it was stored on one of the public servers.
Please see for this the original error message also:
"GP
Hi Thorsten,
Thorsten Sauter wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 07:38:05PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > Works for my key. Did it formerly find key ids for people who aren't in
> > the Debian keyring?
> I have tested it with my own key. And yes it was find before.
> Think it find your because it is
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 07:38:05PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> Works for my key. Did it formerly find key ids for people who aren't in
> the Debian keyring?
I have tested it with my own key. And yes it was find before.
Think it find your because it is in the debian keyring and _not_ only
one
Developers: http://devel.codecastle.com && http://lfs.codecastle.com
-Original Message-
From: Alan Shutko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 8:25 PM
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: gpg -e errors - All garbled output
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I don't know if my locale is causing it or what. The problem is that as
> soon as I try to gpg -e to edit a key I get the following junk.
[23:24:22] wesley:~ $ gpg --help|grep -e -e
-e, --encryptencrypt data
--
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
Scott Dier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm going to Milwaukee, Wisconsin from Minneapolis, Minnesota this
> weekend, and I want to let developers and non-developers alike that if
> they need a gpg key signing to let me know in private.
Milwaukee
Lat: 43 02 N Long: 087 54 W (represented in degree
Scott Dier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm going to Milwaukee, Wisconsin from Minneapolis, Minnesota this
> weekend, and I want to let developers and non-developers alike that if
> they need a gpg key signing to let me know in private.
Minneapolis
Lat: 44 58 N Long: 093 15 W (represented in de
On Sat, 22 Sep 2001, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 08:37:33AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh ([EMAIL
> PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > > On 01-09-18 Joey Hess wrote:
> > > > It'd be nice if someone would look at optimizing it sometime; t
on Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 08:37:33AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh ([EMAIL
PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > On 01-09-18 Joey Hess wrote:
> > > It'd be nice if someone would look at optimizing it sometime; the
> > > behavior I see with strace is absurd, and cou
On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
> On 01-09-18 Joey Hess wrote:
> > It'd be nice if someone would look at optimizing it sometime; the
> > behavior I see with strace is absurd, and could easily be done with no
> > syscalls, at least, by just reading the whole trustdb into memory.
>
> I kn
On 01-09-18 Joey Hess wrote:
> It'd be nice if someone would look at optimizing it sometime; the
> behavior I see with strace is absurd, and could easily be done with no
> syscalls, at least, by just reading the whole trustdb into memory.
I know that the Werner revamped the whole keyring code abou
On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 01:27:20AM -0400, Joey Hess uttered:
> It'd be nice if someone would look at optimizing it sometime; the
> behavior I see with strace is absurd, and could easily be done with no
> syscalls, at least, by just reading the whole trustdb into memory.
>
I doubt very strongly that
Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 11:54:56PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Has anyone else noticed that using gpg with debian-keyring 2001.09.03
> > results in excessively slow trustdb-related things?
>
> This is exactly what I was complaining about on IRC a few days ago. I
> simply am
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 11:54:56PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Has anyone else noticed that using gpg with debian-keyring 2001.09.03
> results in excessively slow trustdb-related things?
This is exactly what I was complaining about on IRC a few days ago. I
simply am not going to use the Debian keyr
On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 04:36:22PM +0200, J.H.M. Dassen Ray" wrote:
> Of course this depends on one's level of paranoia. Using crypto wisely and
> effectively is a matter of keeping one's paranoia high, but not reducing it
> ad absurdum (how do you know I'm not an alien with space/time travel
> tec
Previously Joel Klecker wrote:
> Pardon me? In what manner is it broken?
-sgpg shouldn't be necessary. I've fixed that in my sourcetree (soon
to be in the CVS as well).
Wichert.
--
==
This combination of bytes forms a m
Previously Philip Hands wrote:
> Seems recent to me.
Ah, I vaguely remember James saying he wouldn't update my key since it made
gpg crash or so.. lets hope that bug is fixed by now!
> Looks like you've not uploaded it to debian or anywhere else since
> getting those signatures.
The keyservers c
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [1 ]
> Previously Philip Hands wrote:
> > Given that this key only seems to have been signed by Ray Dassen and
> > itself
>
> Did you update your keyring recently? I have a bit more signatures:
sheikh:~$ dpkg -l debian-keyring
Desired=Unknown/Inst
At 14:39 +0200 1999-09-16, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
I also noticed that the gpg-support is in dpkg-buildpackage is currently
broken.
Pardon me? In what manner is it broken?
--
Joel Klecker (aka Espy)Debian GNU/Linux Developer
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailto:[EMAI
On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 00:02:10 +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> Given that this key only seems to have been signed by Ray Dassen and
> itself,
Even with the updates Wichert mentions, the web of trust for Debian GPG keys
is still a lot sparser than the PGP one. I've pointed out one possible
approach
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Perhaps we should change that so gpg will be used by default if
> $HOME/.gnupg/secring.gpg exists?
Anounce it first and wait some time. I have a $HOME/.gnupg/secring.gpg
but my key isn't in the debian keyring (yet).
--
I congratulate you. Happy gol
Previously Philip Hands wrote:
> Given that this key only seems to have been signed by Ray Dassen and
> itself
Did you update your keyring recently? I have a bit more signatures:
pub 1024D/2FA3BC2D 1998-07-05 Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
sig2FA3BC2D 1998-07-05 Wichert Akkerman <
Previously Joe Drew wrote:
> Also, I think I read something about dpkg-buildpackage automatically
> choosing gpg when you haven't got a .pgp/secring.pgp - I haven't got
> one, but it still chooses PGP anyways. What's up? (My pgp keyrings
> are in the ~/.gnupg directory)
Weird. Is $HOME correct for
Joe Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> gpg: Signature made Wed Sep 15 12:08:31 1999 EDT using DSA key ID 2FA3BC2D
> gpg: Good signature from "Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
> gpg: There is no indication that the si
On Tue, May 18, 1999 at 08:44:36AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> Not true with my version anymore. The files are only under
> /usr/doc/gpg-rsa/examples.
Hm, I still have a diversion from /usr/bin/gpg to /usr/bin/gpg.gnupg,
where /usr/bin/gpg is a script to load the rsa/idea extensions and add
the
On Tue, May 18, 1999 at 01:31:36AM +0200, Alexander N. Benner wrote:
> >From /var/lib/dpkg/diverts:
> /usr/bin/gpg
> /usr/bin/gpg.gnupg
> gpg-rsa
> /usr/man/man1/gpg.1.gz
> /usr/man/man1/gpg.gnupg.1.gz
> gpg-rsa
Not true with my version anymore. The files are only under
/usr/doc/gpg-rsa/examples.
Hi
Ship's Log, Lt. Steve Haslam, Stardate 170599.1408:
>
> The gpg-pgp script and pgp2 compatibility hackage is in gpg-rsaidea, not
> gnupg (afaicr).
>From /var/lib/dpkg/diverts:
/usr/bin/gpg
/usr/bin/gpg.gnupg
gpg-rsa
/usr/man/man1/gpg.1.gz
/usr/man/man1/gpg.gnupg.1.gz
gpg-rsa
I think you are
On Mon, May 17, 1999 at 11:27:39AM +0200, Alexander N. Benner wrote:
> Ship's Log, Lt. Michael Meskes, Stardate 140599.1439:
> > Which version do you use? I don't have that script.
>
>
> Was it removed in the l8est Version ?
> Cannot check the changelog as I still have it ;-)
The gpg-pgp script
Hi
Ship's Log, Lt. Michael Meskes, Stardate 140599.1439:
> Which version do you use? I don't have that script.
> ii gnupg 0.9.6-1GNU privacy guard - a free PGP replacement.
>
I have:
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-confi
On Thu, May 13, 1999 at 12:51:03PM +0200, Alexander N. Benner wrote:
> oops .. have you looked at the debian gpg?
> It is actually a script callin gpg.gnupg (the binary) with exactly these
> options (except the debian-keyring)
Which version do you use? I don't have that script.
Desired=Unknown/In
On Fri, May 14, 1999 at 09:25:49AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > gpgm is not available anymore. I don't have an idea whether this is by
> > design.
>
> Oh? Hmm that I should look into, I've been using it :|
It is by desing. As of version 0.9.6.
--
Mike
On Thu, 13 May 1999, Michael Meskes wrote:
> keyring /home/meskes/.gnupg/pubring.gpg
> secret-keyring /home/meskes/.gnupg/secring.gpg
I'm not sure, I think gpg may add them on its own?
> > PGP 2.x compatible signatures can be generated using this command:
> >
> > gpg --rfc-1991 -a --clearsi
On Wed, May 12, 1999 at 09:34:25PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> load-extension rsa
> load-extension idea
> keyring /usr/share/keyrings/debian-keyring.pgp
> keyring /usr/share/keyrings/debian-keyring.gpg
> keyring /home/jgg/.pgp/pubring.pgp
> secret-keyring /home/jgg/.pgp/secring.pgp
Okay, I did
On Fri, 14 May 1999, Steve Haslam wrote:
> On Thu, May 13, 1999 at 05:19:44PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > (I did "gpg --no-options --load-extension rsa --load-extension idea \
> > > --clearsign -u 0x6494661D --secret-keyring ~/.pgp/secring.pgp \
> > > < testfile > testfile
Incidentally, using a dpkg-buildpackage hacked to use gpg with my RSA
key, I was able to produce a signature that dinstall successfully
verified. Evil patch follows.
--- /usr/bin/dpkg-buildpackage~ Wed Apr 28 22:56:38 1999
+++ /usr/bin/dpkg-buildpackage Thu May 13 08:59:24 1999
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @
On Thu, May 13, 1999 at 05:19:44PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > (I did "gpg --no-options --load-extension rsa --load-extension idea \
> > --clearsign -u 0x6494661D --secret-keyring ~/.pgp/secring.pgp \
> > < testfile > testfile.out")
>
> Try using cat, gpg may try to use fstat
On Thu, 13 May 1999, Steve Haslam wrote:
> gpg --clearsign works, gpg --sign doesn't, seemingly. (ERROR: Nested
> data has unexpected format. CTB=0xCB)
>
> (I did "gpg --no-options --load-extension rsa --load-extension idea \
> --clearsign -u 0x6494661D --secret-keyring ~/.pgp/secring.p
On Thu, May 13, 1999 at 02:33:49PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 May 1999, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
> > AFAIK this is not needed. The only compatibility options I have in my
> > ~/.gnupg/options file are:
>
> I was unable to make it work without the --rfc-1991 argument
afaicr, you
On Thu, 13 May 1999, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> >PGP 2.x compatible signatures can be generated using this command:
> > gpg --rfc-1991 -a --clearsign foo.txt
> AFAIK this is not needed. The only compatibility options I have in my
> ~/.gnupg/options file are:
I was unable to make it work without t
On May 13, Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>PGP 2.x compatible signatures can be generated using this command:
> gpg --rfc-1991 -a --clearsign foo.txt
AFAIK this is not needed. The only compatibility options I have in my
~/.gnupg/options file are:
compress-algo 1
force-v3-sigs
no-co
Hi
Ship's Log, Lt. Jason Gunthorpe, Stardate 120599.2134:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have been doing some reasearch here and I have been able to determine
> that right now GPG represents (with the non-free RSA and IDEA modules) a
> functional replacement for PGP 2.x for both checking signatures and
> cre
91 matches
Mail list logo
