Thank you for your answers Werner. 

I was fairly certain myself about the first question you answered. Its
a 'well its obvious' kind of question.

I wasn't sure about the second one, and I am too snowed under at work
dealing with radius and voip stuff for me to read through the various
*PGP source codes around to look at it from a logical point of view.

Many thanks.


On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 14:06:29 +0200, Werner Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 13:24:39 +0800, Padraig MacIain said:
> 
> > problem. However, does it offer a great risk for something like
> > OpenPGP if the passphrase used to access the secretkey  is partially
> 
> That depends on quality of the passphrase; it makes dictionary attacks
> easier.
> 
> > compromised? And in turn if the passphrase is completely known yet the
> > secret key is still secured (physically) does knowing this passphrase
> > risk a complete compromise of the key pair?
> 
> No.  The protection of the private key is is independent of the key.
> They are in no way related.  The key is based on a random string and
> only the protection of this key is based on the passphrase.  This
> protection only helps against a lost (but protected) private key.
> 
> Salam-Shalom,
> 
>   Werner
> 
> 



-- 
Padraig MacIain
url:  http://www.bur.st/~darke/                 (Nimheil)
"That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons even
death may die."

Reply via email to