pgpenvelope-users Mailing List for pgpenvelope (Page 7)
Brought to you by:
ftobin
Menu
▾
▴
pgpenvelope-users — general pgpenvelope users discussion
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2000 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
(22) |
Mar
(11) |
Apr
(9) |
May
(1) |
Jun
(9) |
Jul
(28) |
Aug
(9) |
Sep
(10) |
Oct
(26) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
(2) |
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
(6) |
Jun
|
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(8) |
Sep
(9) |
Oct
|
Nov
(2) |
Dec
(8) |
| 2002 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
(3) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2003 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(2) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-04-20 11:39:29
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 While this probably won't come up in the next release (which is expected to be soon), I'm currently brainstorming ideas to get a behaviour for pgpenvelope that can do various things based on certain criteria of a message or current settings. Let me expound on this; say for instance you are sending a message to su...@ba...; however, there are two keys which you always want to use by default to encrypt to this person, jo...@ba... and bo...@ba...; neither of these reflects the key id su...@ba..., which pgpenvelope would currently suggest. Another example of a 'default' setting being changed is something like this: "if encrypting is the default as set in ~/.pgpenvelope/prefs, and I'm sending to only jo...@ba..., I want to sign also". This should be possible to implement. If anyone has input on impelementing how such settings would be stored, I'd greatly like to hear from you. I'm sort of new to designing really flexible configuration files. I really can't come up with a concrete example design yet. Implementing in XML, particularly Extended-Backus-Naur Form (EBNF, which is used by sudo(1) in its sudoers(5) file) is a desirable option. I'm researching XML at the moment. Thank goodness I'm taking Programming Languages course at the moment :) This sort of setttings layout might become the default for the ~/.pgpenvelope/prefs, if it appers that it would be the most desirable path. - -- Frank Tobin http://www.uiuc.edu/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAjj+6qYACgkQVv/RCiYMT6O76QCgkOtQKPwwwW65t0GFXvXvObQq AhcAn1jrB5Nh57kGTbPCQ7mzyOJEBQnQ =TQ9t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-04-20 11:21:17
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 For anyone who cares, pgpenvelope's CVS tree is now available: https://sourceforge.net/cvs/?group_id=1628 - -- Frank Tobin http://www.uiuc.edu/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAjj+5l4ACgkQVv/RCiYMT6ORqwCdH0t4X4Un8Jk+29aapzirkoOO FgEAoIxz6fEe4bAJgwLG9rrpZ3dN1nLH =itYu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: L. S. <ra...@qu...> - 2000-03-31 19:36:01
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Neat bug in PGPEnvelope. I am still diagnosing it... but it seems that certain times that I run PGPEnvelope, after I quit Pine, returns are not echo'd to the screen. A "reset" fixes everything. - --Len. __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "All of the chaos Technology Consultant | Makes perfect sense..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Joe Diffie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1d (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE45PyrPYrxsgmsCmoRAsldAJ91ebiqvK7NQ121aNOeAoYId3FnUgCg1KIj XGg7fMx4UO7hyF4/EaBXClw= =4Z25 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: L. S. <ra...@qu...> - 2000-03-22 01:16:12
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Suggestion: Can you make PGPEnvelope accept ^Z while awaiting "commit"? If not, can it be made to spawn a shell? __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "All of the chaos Technology Consultant | Makes perfect sense..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Joe Diffie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1d (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE42B2bPYrxsgmsCmoRAtF4AKCnfWuVbHgcCouDp2dYow/k1EEaaACgzal9 DmIoTrpefNKdcCe1BtE8byg= =2RbC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: L. S. <ra...@qu...> - 2000-03-22 01:14:53
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 There is no noticable performance hit for me. (thetis is an AMD K6 400). On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, Frank Tobin wrote: > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE PROCESSED MESSAGE----- > > L. Sassaman, at 04:47 -0800 on Mon, 20 Mar 2000, wrote: > > > Depends on what level of a performance hit we are talking about here. i > > wouldn't want to wait 90 seconds to select the key I wish to encrypt to. > > I should have been more descriptive in my earlier post. Basically, I'm > still on a p200, and when I do a > > gpg --with-colons --list-keys ft...@ui... > > it takes 12 seconds to finish, which is what I consider to be a big hit > for me on my system. (I should note that for me, this lists three keys, > F40EB65E, 260C4FA3, and 49D683A5, two of which are revoked now). I don't > know what the performance hit on other systems might be like. Try it out, > listing --with-colons the email addresses you would normally encrypt to. > > -- > Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ > > "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, > those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus > > > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > gpg: Signature made Mon Mar 20 12:25:38 2000 PST using DSA key ID 260C4FA3 > gpg: Good signature from "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@bi...>" > gpg: aka "Dekan" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ui...>" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ne...>" > gpg: NOTE: secret key 79CFCD00 is NOT protected. > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > gpg: Fingerprint: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > -----END PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > > _______________________________________________ > pgpenvelope-users mailing list > pgp...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/pgpenvelope-users > __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "All of the chaos Technology Consultant | Makes perfect sense..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Joe Diffie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1d (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE42B1LPYrxsgmsCmoRAgJKAJ4lDkhXrly3uORL0UUCjqK8Spge0wCfSi16 I/1DD0DwYNXB5NyY0IcSt64= =P/aq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-03-20 20:30:52
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 L. Sassaman, at 04:47 -0800 on Mon, 20 Mar 2000, wrote: > Depends on what level of a performance hit we are talking about here. i > wouldn't want to wait 90 seconds to select the key I wish to encrypt to. I should have been more descriptive in my earlier post. Basically, I'm still on a p200, and when I do a gpg --with-colons --list-keys ft...@ui... it takes 12 seconds to finish, which is what I consider to be a big hit for me on my system. (I should note that for me, this lists three keys, F40EB65E, 260C4FA3, and 49D683A5, two of which are revoked now). I don't know what the performance hit on other systems might be like. Try it out, listing --with-colons the email addresses you would normally encrypt to. - -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAjjWiUIACgkQVv/RCiYMT6NPCwCfdCsqXIbwRbMNotOJf/7qINIc rp0An1WR8fnI0bmCpy1W2kRfo4rvL7Ua =v4is -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: L. S. <ra...@qu...> - 2000-03-20 12:52:41
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 18 Mar 2000, Frank Tobin wrote: > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE PROCESSED MESSAGE----- > > As I've just posed to the GnuPG users list, GnuPG can be very slow at > returning key information that includes revocation/disabed key > information (I accomplish through the --with-colons option). > > I was initially considering having pgpenvelope optionally not present keys > to encrypt to that are disabled or revoked. However, the speed hit is > could be big, if I include this functionality. Note that this would only > affect you if you decide to encrypt to people, as signing does not > automatically load the keyring. > > Until this issue with GnuPG can be resolved so that I can get this > information from it faster (which it may not be able to), I'm asking you > for opinions on the issue. I cannot decently provide this as an > 'option'; the code would be a mess. > > The question, summed up, is: Would you be willing to trade possible speed > when loading the keyring for encrypting in exchange for the functionality > of being able to automatically ignore disabled or revoked keys? Depends on what level of a performance hit we are talking about here. i wouldn't want to wait 90 seconds to select the key I wish to encrypt to. > -- > Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ > > "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, > those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus > > > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > gpg: Signature made Sat Mar 18 20:26:14 2000 PST using DSA key ID 260C4FA3 > gpg: Good signature from "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@bi...>" > gpg: aka "Dekan" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ui...>" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ne...>" > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > gpg: Fingerprint: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > -----END PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > > _______________________________________________ > pgpenvelope-users mailing list > pgp...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/pgpenvelope-users > __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "All of the chaos Technology Consultant | Makes perfect sense..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Joe Diffie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1d (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE41h3cPYrxsgmsCmoRAje1AKCsjibPI4bpXqOBtnGGvjL6M0v14ACg8Xmn EjC43hqpUbG36hgbiJQXokU= =v3Ol -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@bi...> - 2000-03-19 04:31:21
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 As I've just posed to the GnuPG users list, GnuPG can be very slow at returning key information that includes revocation/disabed key information (I accomplish through the --with-colons option). I was initially considering having pgpenvelope optionally not present keys to encrypt to that are disabled or revoked. However, the speed hit is could be big, if I include this functionality. Note that this would only affect you if you decide to encrypt to people, as signing does not automatically load the keyring. Until this issue with GnuPG can be resolved so that I can get this information from it faster (which it may not be able to), I'm asking you for opinions on the issue. I cannot decently provide this as an 'option'; the code would be a mess. The question, summed up, is: Would you be willing to trade possible speed when loading the keyring for encrypting in exchange for the functionality of being able to automatically ignore disabled or revoked keys? - -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAjjUVuYACgkQVv/RCiYMT6N2QQCfQTW6EnUjKv22R8M+uRuk8ExG esEAniSH2Sla5vDp2OK9+5DCAZsQ3m6Y =7SmA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@bi...> - 2000-03-13 04:44:15
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 It seems that pgp4pine now does decrypted-message caching, so that means I've gotta get off my butt and start some more developing. I've setup a small survey off of pgpenvelope's SourceForge project page, so if you could go to Surveys section off of: https://sourceforge.net/project/?group_id=1628 and answer the simple questions about caching I have there I'd appreciate it. Thanks. - -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAjjMcQkACgkQVv/RCiYMT6ODwgCeIXME24qIDsWPfCj6Ji3IYFJO zjMAnA4J3UlPaXowsxzmtTANmSiVNgl1 =QYN2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-03-10 09:13:55
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 L. Sassaman, at 01:07 -0800 on Fri, 10 Mar 2000, wrote: > And you said their key isn't on the keyservers; I assume you checked both > NAI's as well? Of course not :) I use horowitz.surfnet.nl, which is linked with the PGPnet servers. - -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAjjIu8sACgkQVv/RCiYMT6MBswCfZ3WCTZ7OqWVJ6Dv+o4N7oPrK mVgAn3Wvegw/H5ecTA57+8MlNPtNGSr2 =lvzG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: L. S. <ra...@qu...> - 2000-03-10 09:11:45
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ah, yes. I should have investigated the situation more thoroughly. :) And you said their key isn't on the keyservers; I assume you checked both NAI's as well? On Fri, 10 Mar 2000, Frank Tobin wrote: > L. Sassaman, at 00:24 -0800 on Fri, 10 Mar 2000, wrote: > > > Try running this message through PGPEnvelope. I think it is getting > > confused by the key included in the key included in the message. > > I noticed this too; first I'd like to rant one-line rant that TL is > moronic to include the key in the messages (it wasn't even on the > keyservers! But I changed that. :) . That being said, I'll continue. > > There is something interesting going on. Note TL sent several messages to > BugTraq; only the first, the one about mtr, fails. The ones about man and > htdig pgpenvelope succeeds on; these also have a public key nested inside, > and pgpenvelope handles these okay. > > I also note also note that the message that failed (the mtr one) was a > forwarded message (while the others were re-directs, or something). This > message does _not_ verify in gnupg; it is not pgpenvelope's fault. The > reason is that TL the forwarded message contains unescaped lines that > begin with dashes (escaping these includes prepending them with a dash > followed by a space). > > Note the line (in raw format, in your signed-backup folder, if you have > it): > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 966e78977e5847d817efed904009f467 mtr-0.42-1.i386.rpm > > It should be: > > - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 966e78977e5847d817efed904009f467 mtr-0.42-1.i386.rpm > > Hence, the person who resent this mesage > invalidated the message for you. I can't do anything about that. It > seems this person gained a few braincells for forwarding the message to > BugTraq the next couple times, though. > > -- > Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ > > "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, > those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus > __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "All of the chaos Technology Consultant | Makes perfect sense..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Joe Diffie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE4yLtDPYrxsgmsCmoRAlBSAKCthc9PWKrnjLt0aGosw72w3G6vYACg7FWe CoQQwPkwooyV6+xsj18/ims= =9bM4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-03-10 08:56:40
|
L. Sassaman, at 00:24 -0800 on Fri, 10 Mar 2000, wrote: > Try running this message through PGPEnvelope. I think it is getting > confused by the key included in the key included in the message. I noticed this too; first I'd like to rant one-line rant that TL is moronic to include the key in the messages (it wasn't even on the keyservers! But I changed that. :) . That being said, I'll continue. There is something interesting going on. Note TL sent several messages to BugTraq; only the first, the one about mtr, fails. The ones about man and htdig pgpenvelope succeeds on; these also have a public key nested inside, and pgpenvelope handles these okay. I also note also note that the message that failed (the mtr one) was a forwarded message (while the others were re-directs, or something). This message does _not_ verify in gnupg; it is not pgpenvelope's fault. The reason is that TL the forwarded message contains unescaped lines that begin with dashes (escaping these includes prepending them with a dash followed by a space). Note the line (in raw format, in your signed-backup folder, if you have it): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 966e78977e5847d817efed904009f467 mtr-0.42-1.i386.rpm It should be: - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 966e78977e5847d817efed904009f467 mtr-0.42-1.i386.rpm Hence, the person who resent this mesage invalidated the message for you. I can't do anything about that. It seems this person gained a few braincells for forwarding the message to BugTraq the next couple times, though. -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-02-16 20:42:02
|
L. Sassaman, at 08:59 on Wed, 16 Feb 2000, wrote: > :0 > * ^Return-Path.*pgp...@li... > Security/PGP/PGPEnvelope It's probably better to use the catch-all * ^TOpgpenvelope-users or something like that. ^TO is a meta-catchall. -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 |
|
From: L. S. <ra...@qu...> - 2000-02-16 14:03:39
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ok, but that is a different situation. You are signing with a revoked key; I as signing with a valid key, with certain revoked uids that GPG was still listing in the "aka" output as though they were valid. On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Frank Tobin wrote: > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE PROCESSED MESSAGE----- > > Frank Tobin, at 01:45 on Wed, 16 Feb 2000, wrote: > > > I'm signing this message with a revoked key of mine; note that this is an > > RSA key. Hopefully, GnuPG will tell you (if you have a recent copy of > > this key from the keyservers) that this key has been revoked. > > As you can see from below, GnuPG for me showed this signature as revoked. > > > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > > > gpg: Signature made Wed Feb 16 01:46:02 2000 CST using RSA key ID 49D683A5 > > gpg: Good signature from "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@bi...>" > > gpg: WARNING: This key has been revoked by its owner! > > gpg: This could mean that the signature is forgery. > > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > > gpg: Fingerprint: 67 E1 E1 E5 28 49 7A 1F 03 7B 36 0D 38 5D 53 28 > > > > -----END PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > > -- > Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ > > "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, > those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus > > OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > gpg: Signature made Wed Feb 16 02:48:04 2000 EST using DSA key ID 260C4FA3 > gpg: Good signature from "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@bi...>" > gpg: aka "Dekan" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ui...>" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ne...>" > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > gpg: Fingerprint: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > -----END PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > > _______________________________________________ > pgpenvelope-users mailing list > pgp...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/pgpenvelope-users > __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "All of the chaos Technology Consultant | Makes perfect sense..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Joe Diffie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE4qq2dPYrxsgmsCmoRAsTEAKCVqGNf+yQWvBuMQ85a7KXjRv8mfgCg/er9 4o8+GXMDOQNVfDGg0EzgOdk= =Jp8l -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: L. S. <ra...@qu...> - 2000-02-16 14:02:03
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I perfer it without, though it doesn't matter. I use procmail for my email sorting, so everything from this list goes into its own folder to begin with. :0 * ^Return-Path.*pgp...@li... Security/PGP/PGPEnvelope On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Frank Tobin wrote: > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE PROCESSED MESSAGE----- > > For a while, I've decided to change the subject prefix of the list to > "[pe-users]"; if it is desired, I'll remove it > altogether. "[pgpenvelope-users]", while being extremely informative, was > just too long, and Pine only shows so many letters of the subject in the > index :) > > -- > Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ > > "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, > those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus > > OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > gpg: Signature made Wed Feb 16 05:16:06 2000 EST using DSA key ID 260C4FA3 > gpg: Good signature from "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@bi...>" > gpg: aka "Dekan" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ui...>" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ne...>" > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > gpg: Fingerprint: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > -----END PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > > _______________________________________________ > pgpenvelope-users mailing list > pgp...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/pgpenvelope-users > __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "All of the chaos Technology Consultant | Makes perfect sense..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Joe Diffie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE4qq08PYrxsgmsCmoRAm4SAJ0X88XWjeenTRuI6RWedDnfX+BNTACgvz/f igZwiItI2RE0QoObSmuURlo= =zTFn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: John P. <pe...@jp...> - 2000-02-16 13:33:06
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Frank Tobin wrote: > What are you people's opinion on the use of a prefix in the subject-line > for messages on this mailing list and pgpenvelope-announce? I'm all for it. It makes a procmail recipe a breeze when lists do this. John Perry KG5RG pe...@jp... PGP-encrypted e-mail welcome! WWW - http://www.jpunix.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/ftobin/resources.html iD8DBQE4qqZo7YSEAxZL264RAi+lAJwJNJ0QtCXpv+zllXWES8SNsaAtbQCfUNuM tnfQHCztMtGrAgQuTcKTHRM= =zqyZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-02-16 10:18:43
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 For a while, I've decided to change the subject prefix of the list to "[pe-users]"; if it is desired, I'll remove it altogether. "[pgpenvelope-users]", while being extremely informative, was just too long, and Pine only shows so many letters of the subject in the index :) - -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net iD4DBQE4qnjmVv/RCiYMT6MRAgcPAJICrlIAdbnSepLLwQYh6mDoKz2iAKCrCHyY xdPpu/DRmrwt81Tg7Eehhg== =3ciy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: L. S. <ra...@qu...> - 2000-02-16 09:56:59
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Frank Tobin wrote: > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE PROCESSED MESSAGE----- > > L. Sassaman, at 04:20 on Wed, 16 Feb 2000, wrote: > > > I don't necessarily think PGPEnvelope should to the lock-file removal; it > > should, however, recognise when there is a lock-file problem and alert the > > user. > > I think this could be possible; this is only needed when pgpenvelope is > decrypting/verifying a message, correct? Right. Only when it is doing something that triggers a key addition/trust adjustment. > -- > Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ > > "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, > those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus > > OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > gpg: Signature made Wed Feb 16 04:41:06 2000 EST using DSA key ID 260C4FA3 > gpg: Good signature from "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@bi...>" > gpg: aka "Dekan" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ui...>" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ne...>" > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > gpg: Fingerprint: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > -----END PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > > _______________________________________________ > pgpenvelope-users mailing list > pgp...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/pgpenvelope-users > __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "All of the chaos Technology Consultant | Makes perfect sense..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Joe Diffie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE4qnPOPYrxsgmsCmoRAhcgAJ9mZWSoz92c1OdO0U3lWfuf5yHS8QCeII0E ejVTh2lgpPtDyrfllcdAmgY= =OTsC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-02-16 09:43:46
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 L. Sassaman, at 04:20 on Wed, 16 Feb 2000, wrote: > I don't necessarily think PGPEnvelope should to the lock-file removal; it > should, however, recognise when there is a lock-file problem and alert the > user. I think this could be possible; this is only needed when pgpenvelope is decrypting/verifying a message, correct? - -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net iD8DBQE4qnCyVv/RCiYMT6MRAl+BAJ9X4MA1G1pAjPSqKFE/HBJVzfbrVACcCFc2 rVR48CE3+WNsh2ePX6GjTNM= =i9U2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: L. S. <ra...@qu...> - 2000-02-16 09:22:57
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Frank Tobin wrote: > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE PROCESSED MESSAGE----- > > L. Sassaman, at 03:30 on Wed, 16 Feb 2000, wrote: > > > > So, in summary, this only happens on received messages? > > > > Or if you select option "i" when sending. > > If you you are importing keys, GnuPG should be able to display to the user > that it is waiting for the lock to clear; is it not doing this when > importing a key from the menu? It does for me. It does, that is correct. Hitting ^C would exit out and allow you to clear the lock. I was just being thorough. > I question whether pgpenvelope should take on removing lockfiles, even > upon user request; there are many issues involved, such as determining the > user's GnuPG home directory. I don't necessarily think PGPEnvelope should to the lock-file removal; it should, however, recognise when there is a lock-file problem and alert the user. > -- > Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ > > "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, > those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus > > OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > > > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > gpg: Signature made Wed Feb 16 03:42:58 2000 EST using DSA key ID 260C4FA3 > gpg: Good signature from "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@bi...>" > gpg: aka "Dekan" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ui...>" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ne...>" > gpg: key 260C4FA3.152: inserted into trustdb > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > gpg: Fingerprint: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > -----END PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > > _______________________________________________ > pgpenvelope-users mailing list > pgp...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/pgpenvelope-users > __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "All of the chaos Technology Consultant | Makes perfect sense..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Joe Diffie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE4qmvVPYrxsgmsCmoRAvhvAKCtZykyUN0ZUoGUF4U810Lgs1NhqACfd9ua SwoyAY+bYQtx/RkaKqu7rWI= =MACH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-02-16 08:45:35
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 L. Sassaman, at 03:30 on Wed, 16 Feb 2000, wrote: > > So, in summary, this only happens on received messages? > > Or if you select option "i" when sending. If you you are importing keys, GnuPG should be able to display to the user that it is waiting for the lock to clear; is it not doing this when importing a key from the menu? It does for me. I question whether pgpenvelope should take on removing lockfiles, even upon user request; there are many issues involved, such as determining the user's GnuPG home directory. - -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net iD8DBQE4qmMSVv/RCiYMT6MRAr51AJ95cmH0oBVd3ixWafL0ZffLs/y8VQCeOtzU WYU9GjU6gbAKbHngDEZeOBk= =VSKE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: L. S. <ra...@qu...> - 2000-02-16 08:33:14
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Frank Tobin wrote: > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE PROCESSED MESSAGE----- > > L. Sassaman, at 01:56 on Wed, 16 Feb 2000, wrote: > > > From what I can tell, it occurs when gpg tries to alter the file that is > > locked (either keyring or trust.db). > > > > So basically, whenever GnuPG tries to verify sigs for which the signing > > key is not on the keyring, this will occur. > > > > This is particularily troublesome with the procmail implementation. > > So, in summary, this only happens on received messages? Or if you select option "i" when sending. > -- > Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ > > "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, > those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus > > OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > gpg: Signature made Wed Feb 16 02:04:23 2000 EST using DSA key ID 260C4FA3 > gpg: Good signature from "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@bi...>" > gpg: aka "Dekan" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ui...>" > gpg: aka "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@ne...>" > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > gpg: Fingerprint: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 > > -----END PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > > _______________________________________________ > pgpenvelope-users mailing list > pgp...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/pgpenvelope-users > __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "All of the chaos Technology Consultant | Makes perfect sense..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Joe Diffie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE4qmAtPYrxsgmsCmoRAl+BAKCvTGOIiBW4Cr3yQPLXpWYPOAjMwQCfQNDT YYmrjP4NcMdBTs2QrQu9YlE= =6wcq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-02-16 08:06:22
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 What are you people's opinion on the use of a prefix in the subject-line for messages on this mailing list and pgpenvelope-announce? - -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net iD8DBQE4qlniVv/RCiYMT6MRArqBAKCFO1IdkfbElr68jYsVcNVdvpP3EQCgnbkR iIWptyRvDUIkEfysyzl8nQQ= =mWXN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-02-16 07:50:47
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Frank Tobin, at 01:45 on Wed, 16 Feb 2000, wrote: > I'm signing this message with a revoked key of mine; note that this is an > RSA key. Hopefully, GnuPG will tell you (if you have a recent copy of > this key from the keyservers) that this key has been revoked. As you can see from below, GnuPG for me showed this signature as revoked. > -----BEGIN PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- > > gpg: Signature made Wed Feb 16 01:46:02 2000 CST using RSA key ID 49D683A5 > gpg: Good signature from "Frank J. Tobin <ft...@bi...>" > gpg: WARNING: This key has been revoked by its owner! > gpg: This could mean that the signature is forgery. > gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. > gpg: Fingerprint: 67 E1 E1 E5 28 49 7A 1F 03 7B 36 0D 38 5D 53 28 > > -----END PGPENVELOPE INFORMATION----- - -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net iD8DBQE4qlY0Vv/RCiYMT6MRAv69AJ4nv4cNBZ722YbnPczf1iM96ARI3gCeJFjI THj7EXwI8+nJWpfRQKfhWu4= =iy7S -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Frank T. <ft...@ui...> - 2000-02-16 07:48:39
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I'm signing this message with a revoked key of mine; note that this is an RSA key. Hopefully, GnuPG will tell you (if you have a recent copy of this key from the keyservers) that this key has been revoked. If you have already received this message, and don't have your key updated yet, and you used procmail to verify this message, hopefully you used the 'signed-backup' recipe, and can re-verify the message by viewing the message in that folder. - -- Frank Tobin http://www.neverending.org/~ftobin/ "To learn what is good and what is to be valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus OpenPGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD) Comment: pgpenvelope - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net iQCVAwUBOKpVutW+qMFJ1oOlAQEJWQP+LyjeY6pyNfApsQlKUQjgZJ7ALw0DNVef oC/k29I9Z3ZS6blhx4RR+E3kH/WSWpNPs3KFcWkxSKBB9fLBQF/ApCnoLxuGwJKw y3jSjy/QPqXE76rLlysLyAN3NDrGXMcO6ZB+65SLQhkB/2luZPglG+7PGNhyM8le NJazFGnqWNM= =uA26 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
2 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
