Stefano Tranquillini wrote:
> the fact is that no passphrase is asked
When you hit the Enter key after typing your decrypt command, it might also be
closing the pinentry dialog immediately before it can appear on screen. Make
sure you don't hold down the Enter key at all - just tap it once as b
Have you tried changing the certificate's Owner Trust? Since you imported the
private key (as opposed to generating it), the trust is unknown. Owner trust
should probably be set to "full".
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists
Edgar Pettijohn wrote:
> thought I read somewhere that gpg creates version 4 packets.
True. But the version 4 public-key packet specification only tells you what
information will be contained in the packet, not the format used for the packet
header.
- fuzzy
_
Edgar Pettijohn wrote:
> the first word is `99' which in binary would be
> `10011001'. I was expecting to encounter `11000110'.
You were expecting the packet header to be written in the "new" format, but it
is actually written in the "old" format (indicated by it beginning with "10" vs
"11").
It is definitely my error in the m value I was hashing, which I failed to
notice was not the same given in the documentation. I somehow repeatedly
overlooked the fact that my obtained m value was different and only noticed
that d (the hash) mismatch. Oops.
Looking more carefully, I see did no
I don't know if this is an error in the documentation, but I cannot obtain the
sha256 result here:
| A.2. Sample EdDSA signature
|
|The signature is created using the sample key over the input data
|"OpenPGP" on 2015-09-16 12:24:53 and thus the input to the hash
|function is:
|
|
Wouldn't it make more sense to hash only the public-key's MPI value(s)? That
way if an implementation's code fails to generate a unique key-pair, it will be
known because the fingerprint will be the same as some other key.
But as it is, with the Fingerprint hash including the timestamp, any
"co
On January 24, 2018 11:58 PM, Werner Koch wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 08:41, gnupg-users@gnupg.org said:
>
>>I would like to clean the key of the spam signatures while preserving
>> any signatures made by Alice (or anyone else I have trusted on my
>> keyring). Does there exist a command/option to
After looking at the content of subpacket 33, it appears to be the
signing-key's fingerprint prepended by '0x04'.
So I'm guessing subpacket 33 is to be a more robust version of subpacket 16
(Issuer)?
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
​Hello, I am working to better understand the OpenPGP standard and how it is
handled by the current implementation of GnuPG.
To this end I have created a Python program that reads ASCII-Armor and returns
details about the encoded data within. This is purely for my own edification
and understand
I guess I had stopped reading about ' clean' after the first line:
>clean Compact (by removing all signatures except the selfsig)
...however the rest of the description indicates it does exactly what I need.
Doh!
Many thanks!___
Gnupg-users mai
Title says it all.
Say I import Bob's key with "--recv-key" from some keyserver. Bob's public key
has been signed by a lot of non-serious User ID's and spam. However Bob's key
may have been signed by Alice (whose public-key I have in my keyring).
I would like to clean the key of the spam signat
12 matches
Mail list logo