I run into this bug and found the cause:
When starting dnsmasq, a call to resolvconf is made to update the server
entries. If postfix is installed, the /etc/resolvconf/update-libc.d/postfix
script is called which tries to reload it.
The problem is that dnsmasq is a nss-lookup.target, while postfi
So, what's the deal with this?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1371766
Title:
Latest CVE-2014-5270 patch breaks ElGamal keys of 16k
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https
Bug opened:
https://bugs.g10code.com/gnupg/issue1732
** Bug watch added: GnuPG Bugs #1732
https://bugs.g10code.com/gnupg/issue1732
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1371766
Title:
La
Small update on the upstream issue I opened:
there is no way for GnuPG to support keys larger than 4k, although it's a
one-line patch. Please read the explanation in the link above.
I see two possible outcomes of this:
1) Just add a tiny patch which increase the secure memory to 128k, keep the 16k
2014-09-19 13:45:15.448 [DEBUG] enigmailCommon.jsm: encryptMessageEnd:
uiFlags=1, sendFlags=0043, outputLen=5906
2014-09-19 13:45:15.448 [DEBUG] enigmailCommon.jsm: parseErrorOutput: status
message:
[GNUPG:] USERID_HINT 0B7D1987135C7291 Ciaby
[GNUPG:] NEED_PASSPHRASE 0B7D1987135C7291 0B7D1987135C7291 17
Well, the first commit just limits the key generation size. I'm fine with
that, but breaking GnuPG for _currently_ used keys it's a totally different
matter. I have been using this key for a while (let's say, a year and a half?)
without any problems.
This, for me, is clearly a regression.
The
These are the current limits:
ciaby@lila:~$ ulimit -a
core file size (blocks, -c) 0
data seg size (kbytes, -d) unlimited
scheduling priority (-e) 0
file size (blocks, -f) unlimited
pending signals (-i) 23805
max locked memory
...and it works. So, the problem is:
with the latest patch, the usual amount of secure memory (32768 bytes) is not
sufficient anymore. I just raised it to another arbitrary number (262144) and
it works fine.
Wouldn't it be sufficient to just raise secmem_init() in g10/gpg.c ?
--
You received th
:D
Cheers
Ciaby
** Attachment added: "python-apt & update-manager-core (FIXED) for amd64"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/12080391/pkgs.tar.bz2
--
[hardy] pycentral crashed with ValueError in parse_versions()
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/192992
You received this bug notification
