In this situation, I just want to avoid creating a new key-pair as
long as possible and ed448 is likely to survive just a bit longer from
what I understand.
Why is it so important your keypair be as long-lived as possible, when
there's very little likelihood of you going for that long a period
On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:07, Andrew Gallagher said:
> The evidence would suggest that pinentry-gnome3 v1.1.0-2 on Debian
> blindly uses `:0` no matter what parameters are passed.
Oh pinentry-gnome - it is intertwined with the gnome-keyring stuff and
does all kind of surprings things. Indeed, the
On 11/03/2020 16:21, Werner Koch wrote:
> Oh pinentry-gnome - it is intertwined with the gnome-keyring stuff and
> does all kind of surprings things.
That explains *eeeverything* :-D
Thanks.
--
Andrew Gallagher
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:30, Jonathan Cross said:
> How will older clients deal with a certification signature from this
> unrecognized algorithm?
They want use them and print a '?' with --check-sigs.
> Yes, I intend to do this with the subkeys (Curve25519)
> Only the primary (certification key)
On 11/03/2020 12:30, Jonathan Cross via Gnupg-users wrote:
> ed448 is likely to survive just a bit longer from what I understand.
It depends on how soon you think general-purpose quantum computers will
be available. Elliptic-curve keys are *less* resistant to quantum
algorithms than
>> Is ed448 available / in development?
>
> Will be part of 2.3.
Great news!
> However, even then I do not suggest to create such
> a key because the majority of deployed software won't be able to use
> it.
How will older clients deal with a certification signature from this
unrecognized
On 3/11/2020 11:47 AM, Andrew Gallagher wrote:
> On 11/03/2020 10:07, Andrew Gallagher wrote:
>>
>> The evidence would suggest that pinentry-gnome3 v1.1.0-2 on Debian
>> blindly uses `:0` no matter what parameters are passed.
>
> As suggested by the stackoverflow answer here:
>
>
On 11/03/2020 10:07, Andrew Gallagher wrote:
>
> The evidence would suggest that pinentry-gnome3 v1.1.0-2 on Debian
> blindly uses `:0` no matter what parameters are passed.
As suggested by the stackoverflow answer here:
https://superuser.com/a/1327409/244202
I used update-alternatives to
On 11/03/2020 09:04, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:59, Andrew Gallagher said:
>
>> reprepro uses gpgme, so it doesn't support `pinentry-mode loopback` (it
>> crashes if I try). And since I am normally logged in to my home machine,
>
> GPGME supports pinentry modes since 1.4.0
On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:59, Andrew Gallagher said:
> reprepro uses gpgme, so it doesn't support `pinentry-mode loopback` (it
> crashes if I try). And since I am normally logged in to my home machine,
GPGME supports pinentry modes since 1.4.0 (release early 2013):
7.4.7 Pinentry Mode
On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 20:30, Jonathan Cross said:
> Is ed448 available / in development?
Will be part of 2.3. However, even then I do not suggest to create such
a key because the majority of deployed software won't be able to use
it. If you care about the secuity of your key use a smartcard.
11 matches
Mail list logo