At Mon, 27 Jul 2015 17:51:56 +0200,
Patrick Brunschwig wrote:
>
> On 27.07.15 14:15, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I guess you mean this:
> >
> > The idea I have in mind is roughly as follows: if you upload a key to
> > a keyserver, the keyserver would send an encrypted email to ev
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Monday 27 July 2015 at 1:33:42 PM, in
, Daniel Baur wrote:
> What could be a problem: The state or the ISP could
> create a key-pair of its own and upload it, intercept
> the mail and verify it.
That certainly would be a problem. I've no i
Hello,
I have a problem with my Key. I have a 4096bit RSA key since 2012 and it
is stored on a OpenPGP smartcard.
Recently I added three new 2048bit subkeys, because I bought a Yubikey
NEO device and want to use PGP on my phone/tablet with Android and NFC.
This worked as expected. I created the ne
> Point blank: quantum computers cannot solve NP-Hard problems. Period,
> end of sentence. NP-Hard is where the ridiculously difficult problems
> live.
For those who like pedantry: NP-Hard is the name given to any problem
that is as hard, or harder, than any problem in NP. The Traveling
Salesma
Some people have been all abuzz over this article lately:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/07/currently-quantum-computers-might-be.html
Rather than go through it point by point I'm just going to talk about
the author's closing paragraph, which one would expect to have been
pretty closely checked pri
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi Ingo,
On 27.07.15 16:31, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> This whole concept of a whitelist of "trusted validation servers"
> included in the email clients sounds a lot like the CA certificate
> bundles included in browsers and/or OSes. Who is going to mai
On 2015/07/27 at 21:08, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> If this is not right please point me to the proposal. The above is
> just a quote from the single source in your original email. After I
> read that I will respond to your other questions / comments.
>
> :) Neal
>
It's attached in the OP named
Hi Nico,
At Mon, 27 Jul 2015 19:21:10 +0200,
n...@enigmail.net wrote:
>
> Thanks, Neal for the feedback.
> I will try to answer.
>
> Am 27.07.2015 um 14:15 schrieb Neal H. Walfield:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I guess you mean this:
> >
> > The idea I have in mind is roughly as follows: if you upload a
Hi Ingo,
thanks a lot for the feedback.
Am 27.07.2015 um 16:31 schrieb Ingo Klöcker:
> On Monday 27 July 2015 07:55:03 n...@enigmail.net wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> in March we discussed here
>> "German ct magazine postulates death of pgp encryption"
>> and Patrick Brunschwig proposed a way to validat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 07/27/2015 07:55 PM, n...@enigmail.net wrote:
> Hi MFPA, Thanks a lot for your feedback.
..
>
>> Why would the notation value be base64 encoded? What is the
>> rationale for preventing users from reading the notation values
>> in a key listing?
Thanks, Neal for the feedback.
I will try to answer.
Am 27.07.2015 um 14:15 schrieb Neal H. Walfield:
> Hi,
>
> I guess you mean this:
>
> The idea I have in mind is roughly as follows: if you upload a key to
> a keyserver, the keyserver would send an encrypted email to every UID
> in the
On 07/27/2015 07:46 PM, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 14:15, n...@walfield.org said:
>
>
> You can't do that due to the decentralized approach with no
> requirement for the user to always upload to the same keyserver.
> Thus a server may miss validation signatures not yet received fr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi MFPA,
Thanks a lot for your feedback.
Am 27.07.2015 um 15:16 schrieb MFPA:
> Hi
>
>
> On Monday 27 July 2015 at 6:55:03 AM, in
> , n...@enigmail.net wrote:
>
>
>
>> Thus, I am happy for any feedback (details and general
>> remarks) both here
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 14:15, n...@walfield.org said:
> The approach also has another problem: which key servers are going to
> do this? There are 100s of key servers. I'm not going to reply to
> mails from each one, sorry.
As Nico described, PGP used a very simlar system to validate keys and
expi
On 27.07.15 14:15, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I guess you mean this:
>
> The idea I have in mind is roughly as follows: if you upload a key to
> a keyserver, the keyserver would send an encrypted email to every UID
> in the key. Each encrypted mail contains a unique link to confirm t
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 implemente
On Monday 27 July 2015 07:55:03 n...@enigmail.net wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> in March we discussed here
> "German ct magazine postulates death of pgp encryption"
> and Patrick Brunschwig proposed a way to validate email addresses
>
> I also had in mind:
> > http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/
On Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:55, n...@enigmail.net said:
> Thus, I am happy for any feedback
> (details and general remarks)
Plain text would be appreciated. I accidentally accepted that 280k PDF
but sending such files to 2600 subscribes should be the exception.
Salam-Shalom,
Werner
--
Die Ged
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 27/07/2015 14:31, MFPA wrote:
> Hi
>
>
> On Monday 27 July 2015 at 11:46:09 AM, in
> , Marko Božikovic wrote:
>
>
>> I know that, and I'm using 2.1 exclusively... Still, it would be nice
>> to be able to see the state of private keys (e.g. pr
Hello,
Am 27.07.2015 um 14:15 schrieb Neal H. Walfield:
> This approach is not going to stop a nation state. A nation state can
> intercept the mail, decrypt it and follow the link.
>
> For the same reason, it is not going to stop a user's ISP. Given
> Microsoft's et al.'s willingness to coopera
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Monday 27 July 2015 at 11:46:09 AM, in
, Marko Božikovic wrote:
> I know that, and I'm using 2.1 exclusively... Still, it
> would be nice to be able to see the state of private
> keys (e.g. primary key not present in the keyring,
> private
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Monday 27 July 2015 at 6:55:03 AM, in
, n...@enigmail.net wrote:
> Thus, I am happy for any feedback (details and general
> remarks) both here and directly as email to me.
Comments in no particular order, just as they occurred to me when
Hi,
I guess you mean this:
The idea I have in mind is roughly as follows: if you upload a key to
a keyserver, the keyserver would send an encrypted email to every UID
in the key. Each encrypted mail contains a unique link to confirm the
email address. Once all email addresses are confirme
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 27/07/2015 10:14, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 07/27/2015 11:03 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>> On 07/27/2015 10:48 AM, Marko Božiković wrote:
>>> On 25/07/2015 13:26, MFPA wrote:
Hi
>
>
>> ..
>
>>> Ok, but why doesn't it make muc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 07/27/2015 11:03 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 07/27/2015 10:48 AM, Marko Božiković wrote:
>> On 25/07/2015 13:26, MFPA wrote:
>>> Hi
>
>
> ..
>
>> Ok, but why doesn't it make much sense anymore? Is there another
>> way to get private
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 07/27/2015 10:48 AM, Marko Božiković wrote:
> On 25/07/2015 13:26, MFPA wrote:
>> Hi
..
> Ok, but why doesn't it make much sense anymore? Is there another
> way to get private key info while in --edit-key mode? (e.g. key
> location, like the bu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 25/07/2015 13:26, MFPA wrote:
> Hi
>
>
> On Thursday 23 July 2015 at 3:30:27 PM, in ,
> Marko Božikovic wrote:
>
>
>> Hi all,
>
>> I've just noticed that the 'toggle' command in gpg 2.1.5/6 on Windows
>> doesn't switch key display. It still s
27 matches
Mail list logo
