Re: Archaic PGP usage
On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:49, ved...@nym.hush.com said: PGP 2.x can be used as a uuencode, and automatically split a signed and encrypted armored file into 100 smaller files ready to be emailed and reconstitued by the receiver. OpenPGP also defines such an armor option but it is not implemented by GnuPG because: - It is better to use the standard MIME feature for splitting messages. - Mail has replaced BBSs and we have other constraints now than the small maximum message size of 30 years ago. - Remailers need to employ their own system to send data in fixed size charges and can't use the PGP format. Shalom-Salam, Werner -- Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz. ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Archaic PGP usage
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi On Friday 24 July 2015 at 4:49:54 PM, in mid:20150724154954.3fc5041...@smtp.hushmail.com, ved...@nym.hush.com wrote: [2] Large File Transfers PGP 2.x can be used as a uuencode, and automatically split a signed and encrypted armored file into 100 smaller files ready to be emailed and reconstitued by the receiver. The default for file splitting, is 720 armored lines, but have done it for much more, and successfully sent a 1 gb Truecrypt container and reconstituted it. That sounds like a useful feature. But if doing such things often, it may be worth looking at Mike Ingle's Confidant Mail https://confidantmail.org, which has been tested with attachment files of over 4GB. - -- Best regards MFPA mailto:2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-gro...@riseup.net Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJVs4LaXxSAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRCM0FFN0VDQTlBOEM4QjMwMjZBNUEwRjU2 QjdDNzRDRUIzMUYyNUYwAAoJEGt8dM6zHyXwGnoH/ivoLok0kKTygsm5lXXPrZyp M2XYH61sgKDMeYXOSTf5y7dKPxoLSyEUwzC0+VoGyxjZoVw0fyJJ47SzIqID3TL1 xHZkCm8mAf1ylcBDiYI9cw5XATsE9Zv//vU3vhqNPsvgADj4hlDnGByYCAyKJhEX aghaMc+ROpItx0tOTh/lBJJilItxHKKO5+B6Z2EVf4RmKmWmsYrKLwgh3O+ea2ya NKKBOXz9+lCJxd1SRKKUIPnJSVuqHx3i7b3+BFyn5Ju0ZqV1dzlQLJguWgTGRP5B HxDihG4ZWwlewXQ54HaKxkJTeeF7d5tSYXxU6r5PHRFwsk4lz/vdxX82Zk8SD8GI vQQBFgoAZgUCVbOC2l8UgAAuAChpc3N1ZXItZnByQG5vdGF0aW9ucy5vcGVu cGdwLmZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4ubmV0MzNBQ0VENEVFOTEzNEVFQkRFNkE4NTA2MTcx MkJDNDYxQUY3NzhFNAAKCRAXErxGGvd45NuyAQDukt7SUH2zUMxwY69MK7XuRkQV bTffr0+SYYKyAKp6wgD43An11/DtOZo3g+2XDuCR4IlMVX/7T15+6FGgQdrUDg== =Fk1Q -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Archaic PGP usage
On Thu, 23 Jul 2015 23:13, r...@sixdemonbag.org said: 1. PGP 2.6 is *small*. The original PGP specification (RFC1991) is a small fraction of the size of the modern OpenPGP specification (RFC4880). When it comes to trustworthy code, small is beautiful. FWIW, RFC-1991 is not a complete specification of PGP-2. You can't implement a compatible version based on this info. You also need to look into the PGP-2 documentation and finally you need to be able to send questions to another person who can provide an answer based on the PGP-2 source code (which is public but due copyright reasons one better does not do it by oneself). Salam-Shalom, Werner -- Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz. ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Archaic PGP usage
On 7/23/2015 at 2:58 PM, A.T. Leibson jupell...@riseup.net wrote: Do people (other than John Young) still use PGP? Why would someone want to do that? = The only possible reasons I can think of are: [1] Remailer use, Original remailers used PGP 2.x and even though some use GnuPG, others are reluctant to change anything. [2] Large File Transfers PGP 2.x can be used as a uuencode, and automatically split a signed and encrypted armored file into 100 smaller files ready to be emailed and reconstitued by the receiver. The default for file splitting, is 720 armored lines, but have done it for much more, and successfully sent a 1 gb Truecrypt container and reconstituted it. If you are thinking of looking at PGP 2.x, I would recommend Disastry's version, as it is not limited to MD5 and IDA but can use any HASH and any encryption algorithm except for Camelia. http://www.spywarewarrior.com/uiuc/disastry/263multi.htm (btw, If anyone knows how to install this on 64 bit Ubuntu 14.04 please let me know. It wouldn't compile on Ubuntu 12.x, but was able to install the linux executable PGP on a 32 bit system, but can't on 14.x 64 bit.) TIA vedaal ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Archaic PGP usage
I know this list doesn't deal with PGP, but since no else does either any more, it seems like the best place to start. Old versions of PGP were at least FOSS-friendly, if not FOSS themselves, so it's probably safe to discuss it here. :) Do people (other than John Young) still use PGP? Why would someone want to do that? You'd have to ask them. There are some reasons to keep using ancient versions of PGP, but why these specific people keep using ancient PGP is really a question for them and not this list. That said: 1. PGP 2.6 is *small*. The original PGP specification (RFC1991) is a small fraction of the size of the modern OpenPGP specification (RFC4880). When it comes to trustworthy code, small is beautiful. 2. PGP 2.6 is extremely well-audited. GnuPG and Symantec's PGP are both moving targets, but PGP 2.6 really hasn't changed in about 20 years. That gives a lot of confidence that its major bugs have been discovered. 3. PGP 2.6 is good enough crypto. Modern OpenPGP adds a ton more capabilities, but for many users PGP 2.6 offers them just enough to do what they need. The small-is-beautiful camp tends to have a lot of overlap with the good-enough-crypto camp. ... All this being said, do I recommend PGP 2.6? Absolutely not: its dependency on MD5 alone should disqualify it. But that doesn't mean I don't understand some of the motivations of the people who keep using it. ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
