> @rjh: I guess you will now remark about random_seed, but I don't think
> tha this is anymore an issue with modern versions. The entropy
> gathering changed quite a bit in the 2.2 and we may eventually remove
> that file. (Due to the new JitterRNG which is sufficient on Windows and
> the faster
On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 13:01, Mark said:
> Thanks for the explantion of the new public key format. If I understand
> it correctly, the old system was like a flat file an this new one is
> more like an indexed database that allows faster lookups.
Right. The keybox format includes meta data so that
*hundred*
> certificates. And the old, inefficient PGP keyring format doesn't work
> very well any more.
>
> We don't need the PGP compatibility any more and it's holding us back.
> That's the root reason for the changes.
>
>
Damien,
Thanks for the explanation on the keygrips. That makes sense why it is
some "random" set of characters. I understand (I think) it is acting
like a place marker but still trying to understand the why part.
I guess I need to export my keys to make it accessible to other apps
that use PGP
rk
very well any more.
We don't need the PGP compatibility any more and it's holding us back.
That's the root reason for the changes.
_______
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 04:42:40PM +0100, azbigd...@gmx.com wrote:
I'm still a bit confused on the changes in secring. How does it come up
with the names for those "new" keys as it doesn't seem to corrolate
with anything I can see on the keys.
Files under the $GNUPGHOME/private-keys-v1.d
more about) the reasons for the changes.
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2020 at 5:16 PM
From: "Robert J. Hansen"
To: gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Subject: Re: Changes in GnuPG
> Is there anything that really details the changes in this new format
> and why it changed?
https://www.gnup
> Is there anything that really details the changes in this new format
> and why it changed?
https://www.gnupg.org/faq/whats-new-in-2.1.html#keybox
> Also no more secring.gpg. Those files got moved in that "private
> -keys" directory. What I'm also trying to understand is now their
> files names
I was user of GPG4Win years ago and when I reinstalled it I noticed quite a bit has changed. If there is no existing pubring.gpg it creates a new keyring with the new format. Is there anything that really details the changes in this new format and why it changed?
Also no more secring.gpg.
On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 00:00, t...@pobox.com said:
> /usr/bin/gpg1 for users who want to keep using it. Dropping
> the keyserver and photoviewer helpers is part of the next
> planned release from the 1.4.x branch, which is being
> tracked in https://dev.gnupg.org/T3443.
Right. Given that gpg1 is
On December 12, 2018 2:00:18 PM AKST, Todd Zullinger wrote:
>
> the keyserver and photoviewer helpers
>
A permanent record and a mug shot for the cops and every thief, hooker, and
pickpocket on the block, respectively. And they all just help themselves to the
secret key.
Someone puts out a
Wiktor Kwapisiewicz via Gnupg-users wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I recently saw a message from one of Fedora's maintainers:
>
>> Coming soon to Fedora30 (rawhide), gnupg v1.4.x renamed to gnupg1. Also
>> dropping keyserver support at Werner's suggestion since upstream plans to
>> disable that soon.
On 12/12/2018 21:43, Wiktor Kwapisiewicz wrote:
>> Should I issue and publish a revocation certificate? Will this cause
>> problems considering that I'm still using the same master key?
>
> I don't think revocation is necessary if the private subkeys are still safe.
Yes, they are still safe.
On 12.12.2018 22:35, Andrew Luke Nesbit wrote:
> My subkeys expired on Monday, 10/12/2018. I've updated my subkeys with
> a new expiration date (in one year). I'm considering NOT uploading the
> new public keys to the keyservers. Rather, I will distribute them using
> other channels, such as
On 12/12/2018 09:15, Wiktor Kwapisiewicz via Gnupg-users wrote:
>> Coming soon to Fedora30 (rawhide), gnupg v1.4.x renamed to gnupg1. Also
>> dropping keyserver support at Werner's suggestion since upstream plans to
>> disable that soon.
>
> Source:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 08:05:58 -0900, justina colmena via Gnupg-users wrote:
> One disadvantage of "keyservers" in general is that the automated queries to
> them leak "too much information" on the
> parties with whom one is communicating - even the fact that one is using PGP
> at all.
This can
On December 12, 2018 2:35:43 AM AKST, Stefan Claas
wrote:
>On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 10:15:33 +0100, Wiktor Kwapisiewicz via Gnupg-users
>wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I recently saw a message from one of Fedora's maintainers:
>>
>> > Coming soon to Fedora30 (rawhide), gnupg v1.4.x renamed to gnupg1.
On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 10:15:33 +0100, Wiktor Kwapisiewicz via Gnupg-users wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I recently saw a message from one of Fedora's maintainers:
>
> > Coming soon to Fedora30 (rawhide), gnupg v1.4.x renamed to gnupg1. Also
> > dropping keyserver support at Werner's
> > suggestion
Hello all,
I recently saw a message from one of Fedora's maintainers:
> Coming soon to Fedora30 (rawhide), gnupg v1.4.x renamed to gnupg1. Also
> dropping keyserver support at Werner's suggestion since upstream plans to
> disable that soon.
Source:
19 matches
Mail list logo
