Migrate? That data is in my mail archive. While it would be possible for
me to write a program to scan the mail file for pgp blockes, check which
pgp version is used, decrypt the data, re-encrypt it with a modern gpg
version and replace that textblock, it would still lose information
about dates
Lucky for me I never use that version, as I never respected the
copyright of the RSA and IDEA algorithms (questionable in Europe anyway).
Patents, not copyrights.
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
On 18-01-2022 17:23, 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.
Lucky for me I never use that version, as I never respected the
copyright of the RSA and IDEA
On 18-01-2022 15:54, Robert J. Hansen via Gnupg-users wrote:
>> 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
On 1/16/2022 at 6:12 PM, "Robert J. Hansen via Gnupg-users" wrote:On
this mailing list we sometimes see requests for help from people
running dangerously antique versions of GnuPG. Wasn't all that long
ago
I was asked for help with something in the 1.2 series (!!). Without
exception, our
break (or crack) AES256, it
> merely spotted the key (no small feat for sure!)
(Long and nerdy. All of this history is off the top of my head, no
notes. I may be in error in some places.)
Depends on how one considers side channel attacks! It's true that we
didn't successfully cryptanalyze
12 matches
Mail list logo
