Re: gpg-errors with apt
On 7/7/05, Steve Kemp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 12:22:36PM +0200, Johann Spies wrote: I have read http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/174 about this topic and have done what the article suggested: ~# gpg --keyserver keyring.debian.org --recv 4F368D5D This imports the key for the Debian Unstable archive. I think you need to use 'apt-key' to import keys used to check debian repositories.
Re: Mutt and inline gpg
On Thu, 09 Aug 2001, Marc Leeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote...
: kmail sends the gpg messages inline, and upon arrival decodes them
: immediately. In my config, mutt sends them as attachments.
: When I get a kmail message, I have to save it to file and manually
: decode it (not that difficult, but annoying). Mutt doesn't recognise
: the inline format of kmail.
: When my friends (2 differnt ones, one of which is planning to switch
: to mutt) get the mails, they get it in an attachment, have to save it
: and decode it manually (apparently kmail is expecting inline messages).
: Obviously, mutt/mutt and kmail/kmail messages are working perfectly.
`-
I've seen a few procmail recipes around which remedy this.
# Convert old-style PGP messages to MIME
:0
* !^Content-Type: multipart/
* !^Content-Type: application/pgp
{
:0 fBw
* ^-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
* ^-END PGP MESSAGE-
| formail -i Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text; x-action=encrypt
:0 fBw
* ^-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
* ^-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
* ^-END PGP SIGNATURE-
| formail -i Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text; x-action=sign
}
I cant take credit for this, its part of a procmail file I've put together
from multiple sources.
[--]
Matt 'Dopey' Hope [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP signature
Re: Mutt and inline gpg
On Thu, 09 Aug 2001, Marc Leeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote...
: kmail sends the gpg messages inline, and upon arrival decodes them
: immediately. In my config, mutt sends them as attachments.
: When I get a kmail message, I have to save it to file and manually
: decode it (not that difficult, but annoying). Mutt doesn't recognise
: the inline format of kmail.
: When my friends (2 differnt ones, one of which is planning to switch
: to mutt) get the mails, they get it in an attachment, have to save it
: and decode it manually (apparently kmail is expecting inline messages).
: Obviously, mutt/mutt and kmail/kmail messages are working perfectly.
`-
I've seen a few procmail recipes around which remedy this.
# Convert old-style PGP messages to MIME
:0
* !^Content-Type: multipart/
* !^Content-Type: application/pgp
{
:0 fBw
* ^-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
* ^-END PGP MESSAGE-
| formail -i Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text;
x-action=encrypt
:0 fBw
* ^-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
* ^-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
* ^-END PGP SIGNATURE-
| formail -i Content-Type: application/pgp; format=text; x-action=sign
}
I cant take credit for this, its part of a procmail file I've put together
from multiple sources.
[--]
Matt 'Dopey' Hope [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp5sFareYWeA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: shared root account
On Fri, 06 Jul 2001, Juha J?ykk? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote... : (Put the public key in the .authorized_keys file for the root user) : TUrn on RSA/DSA authentication and 'allow root login' : One word of warning aboce would allow logging in using root password as well : : I distrust allowing root logins from anywhere but local console(s) : or non-modem gettys i.e. from anywhere over the not-owned-by-me cable. : Any other ideas? Or is it really safe to allow root logins to sshd? : It is just an old rule of thumb that root must never log on over the : wire but that may be old news from times of telnet - never had any : need of root logins over the wire until perhaps now. Try using ssh keys, as described above, however, in the ~root/.ssh/authorised_keys file, prepend all the keys with from=127.0.0.1 /dopey
