Hello David,
Thanks so much for responding...
We have switched from PGP to GPG and we have some of our customers are still
using PGP,
¨PGPÁÀNŠˆæ ° is the first part of the message.
What you said below is suspicous, I did notice a null value 00, hex 20 20, at
the end of the file, I strippe
Atom Smasher wrote:
>btw, what's the threat model where this is advantageous?
I can imagine it might be used for plausible deniability: if some law
enforcement agency would force you to decrypt the messsage, you could
claim you can't and you didn't read it anyway because it's corrupted.
Of cours
Ok, will do, in this case they send 10 files each day and maybe 1 a week errors
out like this...
Thanks again,
Eric
-
Eric Robinson
Business Application Advisor
FedEx Corporate Services
Internet Engineering & EC Integration
901.263.5749
---
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 09:17:39PM +0100, Tristan Williams wrote:
> It works as you suggested.
>
> gpg is now happy with smartB (and longer asks for smartA). The file
> I encrypted with the public key is decrypted correctly.
> gpg now references smartB not smartA when listing keys.
>
> So wha
On 13 Jun 2006, at 20:37, David Shaw wrote:
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:01:27PM +0100, Tristan Williams wrote:
I am experimenting with the OpenPGP smartcard. I have two OpenPGP
smart
cards (smartA and smartB) and I want to verify that I can restore my
on-card generated private key should I lo
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:01:27PM +0100, Tristan Williams wrote:
> I am experimenting with the OpenPGP smartcard. I have two OpenPGP smart
> cards (smartA and smartB) and I want to verify that I can restore my
> on-card generated private key should I loose the master card
> (smartA). I only want t
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 06:46:48PM +0100, Tristan Williams wrote:
> On 13Jun06 18:07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:01:27PM +0100, Tristan Williams wrote:
> > > I am experimenting with the OpenPGP smartcard. I have two OpenPGP smart
> > > cards (smartA and smartB) and I wa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 06:46:48PM +0100, Tristan Williams wrote:
>
> Then it makes me wonder what is the purpose of the off card backup
> file sk_X.gpg created when the original private key was created via
> the on-card method?
>
Huh, according
On Tuesday 13 June 2006 19:03, markus reichelt wrote:
> * markus reichelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Essentially you're saying: no backup of a private key generated
> > on/via a smartcard cannot be exported. Because if it could be
> > exported, importing the key(s) in question just works.
>
> S
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 01:40:51PM -0500, Eric Robinson wrote:
> Hello David,
> Thanks so much for responding...
>
> We have switched from PGP to GPG and we have some of our customers are still
> using PGP,
>
> ¨PGPÁÀNŠˆæ ° is the first part of the message.
>
> What you said below is suspi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
alifbaa wrote:
> I am currently using GPG 1.4.3 on my mac powerbook G4 OSX 10.4.6 I hope that
> this is the right forum to post this question, but when i send an email with
> attachment and encrypt and sign it, it converts the message into two
> attac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 06:55:17PM +0200, markus reichelt wrote:
>
> I'm not a smartcard user (somehow the concept hasn't been able to
> convince me ... yet), but what you write really sounds rather
> strange. Essentially you're saying: no backup
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 07:03:42PM +0200, markus reichelt wrote:
>
> Sorry, that was heat-induced and shall read of course as follows:
>
No need to apologize :)
>
> Essentially you're saying: a private key generated on/via a smartcard
> cannot
I am currently using GPG 1.4.3 on my mac powerbook G4 OSX 10.4.6 I hope that
this is the right forum to post this question, but when i send an email with
attachment and encrypt and sign it, it converts the message into two
attachments, one that says "mime-attachment" and one that says "pgp.asc".
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 10:37:07AM -0500, Eric Robinson wrote:
> Is anyone familiar with the following error?
>
> Standard Error: gpg: WARNING: unsafe permissions on homedir
> "/opt/fxnet/gpg"gpg: WARNING: using insecure memory!gpg: please see
> http://www.gnupg.org/faq.html for more informationgp
On 13Jun06 18:07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:01:27PM +0100, Tristan Williams wrote:
> > I am experimenting with the OpenPGP smartcard. I have two OpenPGP smart
> > cards (smartA and smartB) and I want to verify that I can restore my
> > on-card generated private key shoul
Is anyone familiar with the following error?
Standard Error: gpg: WARNING: unsafe permissions on homedir
"/opt/fxnet/gpg"gpg: WARNING: using insecure memory!gpg: please see
http://www.gnupg.org/faq.html for more informationgpg: encrypted with
1024-bit ELG-E key, ID 07B01208, created 2004-07-14 "en
* markus reichelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Essentially you're saying: no backup of a private key generated
> on/via a smartcard cannot be exported. Because if it could be
> exported, importing the key(s) in question just works.
Sorry, that was heat-induced and shall read of course as follows:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If you want to have the same private key on several physical cards,
> your only option is off-card generation, with import of the key
> afterwards.
I'm not a smartcard user (somehow the concept hasn't been able to
convince me ... yet), but what you write really sounds
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:01:27PM +0100, Tristan Williams wrote:
> I am experimenting with the OpenPGP smartcard. I have two OpenPGP smart
> cards (smartA and smartB) and I want to verify that I can restore my
> on-card generated private key shou
I am experimenting with the OpenPGP smartcard. I have two OpenPGP smart
cards (smartA and smartB) and I want to verify that I can restore my
on-card generated private key should I loose the master card
(smartA). I only want to verify that I can do it - not discuss the
merits of on-card vs. off-card
Am Dienstag, 13. Juni 2006 09:02 schrieb Samuel ]slund:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 11:55:54PM +0200, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> > No, it doesn't. You are still believing in security-by-obscurity
> > meaning that your additional "encryption" only works as long as you
> > and the recipient are the only one
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 11:55:54PM +0200, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> No, it doesn't. You are still believing in security-by-obscurity meaning
> that your additional "encryption" only works as long as you and the
> recipient are the only ones who know the secret rule.
Please Ingo, _all_ encryption is
23 matches
Mail list logo
