Re: Side-channel attacks

2022-01-18 Thread vedaal via Gnupg-users
On 1/18/2022 at 11:26 AM, "Robert J. Hansen via Gnupg-users" wrote:> 1.4 should be able to decrypt all 2.6 generated data. Not from the Disastry builds, which extended 2.6 to support newer algorithms. = 1.4 still can decrypt and verify anything in Disastry's last build. He died before

Re: Side-channel attacks

2022-01-18 Thread Стефан Васильев via Gnupg-users
Johan Wevers wrote: On 17-01-2022 0:09, Robert J. Hansen via Gnupg-users wrote: I was asked for help with something in the 1.2 series (!!).  Without exception, our first response is usually "for the love of God, upgrade!" They rarely do.  It's worked fine for them for a decade or more, and

Re: gpg --verify in batch mode / how to require a trust level?

2022-01-18 Thread Werner Koch via Gnupg-users
On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 15:59, Bernd Graf said: > How can I require `gpg --verify` to only accept keys from my keyring > with a certain trust level and fail otherwise (rc!=0) Use gpgv instead of gpg. Salam-Shalom, Werner -- Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

Re: gpg --verify in batch mode / how to require a trust level?

2022-01-18 Thread Ingo Klöcker
On Dienstag, 18. Januar 2022 15:59:11 CET Bernd Graf via Gnupg-users wrote: > How can I require `gpg --verify` to only accept keys from my keyring > with a certain trust level and fail otherwise (rc!=0) > > Alternatively, how can I check that a signature was done with a specific > key? Use gpgv

Re: Side-channel attacks

2022-01-18 Thread Werner Koch via Gnupg-users
On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 09:50, Johan Wevers said: > Well, a bit more respect for backwards compatibility would help a lot by > that. Now I'm forced to keep an 1.4 and pgp 2.6 version installed just 1.4 should be able to decrypt all 2.6 generated data. Shalom-Salam, Werner -- Die Gedanken

Re: Side-channel attacks

2022-01-18 Thread Robert J. Hansen via Gnupg-users
1.4 should be able to decrypt all 2.6 generated data. Not from the Disastry builds, which extended 2.6 to support newer algorithms. ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

gpg --verify in batch mode / how to require a trust level?

2022-01-18 Thread Bernd Graf via Gnupg-users
Hi, for a backup integrity protection, I want to add a signature check to the restore script to reject the backup files that are not properly signed. So far, so good. #$ gpg --verify backup.tar.sig #$ if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then echo "backup is not properly signed!"; exit 1; fi #$ tar xzvf

gpg --verify in batch mode / how to require a trust level?

2022-01-18 Thread Bernd Graf via Gnupg-users
Hi, for a backup integrity protection, I want to add a signature check to the restore script to reject the backup files that are not properly signed. So far, so good. #$ gpg --verify backup.tar.sig #$ if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then echo "backup is not properly signed!"; exit 1; fi #$ tar xzvf

Re: Side-channel attacks

2022-01-18 Thread Robert J. Hansen via Gnupg-users
Well, a bit more respect for backwards compatibility would help a lot by that. Now I'm forced to keep an 1.4 and pgp 2.6 version installed just to be able to read all my old data. Some people just refuse to update to versions that routinely break backwards compatibility. You've had literally 27

Re: Side-channel attacks

2022-01-18 Thread Johan Wevers via Gnupg-users
On 17-01-2022 0:09, Robert J. Hansen via Gnupg-users wrote: > I was asked for help with something in the 1.2 series (!!).  Without > exception, our first response is usually "for the love of God, upgrade!" > > They rarely do.  It's worked fine for them for a decade or more, and > they're not