 > Hi, > I got a problem generating a key pair, when I run the code, it
return a > General error code :/. > If you could give me a sample on how
to gen a key or fix my code it > would be nice :) >
As you're using Thunderbird, why not add the Enigmail extension, and let
that do it for you simply and automatically?

Regards,

Bob

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

From stebe at mailbox.org  Tue Dec 29 15:05:35 2015
From: stebe at mailbox.org (stebe at mailbox.org)
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 15:05:35 +0100 (CET)
Subject: advice please (just about the same over here)
In-Reply-To: <56824D53.2000804@galen.org.uk>
References: 

 <04c7500e31814d08bf29f1586ad12da1@t1l1exchmbs-01.fchn.com>

 <56824D53.2000804@galen.org.uk>
Message-ID: <653946150.20246.0908b4f2-5a5f-4173-ad10-b90afa4f1ed8.open-xchange@office.mailbox.org>

> Bob Henson  hat am 29. Dezember 2015 um 10:07
> geschrieben:
> 
> 
> On 28/12/2015 10:22 pm, Jay Sulzberger wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, 28 Dec 2015, Steve Butler  wrote:
> > 

> If, as you imply above, you are looking for a more universal system of
> encryption, then PGP/OpenPGP certainly isn't the one to use - it is
> intended to be a "person to person" system used between people known to
> one another and whose keys can be countersigned with absolute certainty.
> There is already a system, albeit far from perfect, which lends itself
> to large scale use and that is the X.509 certificate system - already
> widely used.
> 
(Sorry for appending a slightly off-topic question to this thread, well, I
really like the person-to person design of gpg and the WebofTrust, and the
enigmail extension makes it quite easy to get along, the Enigmail handbook
is written in a clear and concise manner suited for beginners as well as
for more technical users...whenever you need a free German translation,
knock on my door!)

By the way, talking about the X509 certificate system, which is the exact
command line syntax to verify (using openssl, I guess) a given
certificate's signature by using the public key of the certificate that
has issued the certificate to be verified? 
openssl verify pkeyutl (and what else? "sigfile=file" AND "pkey" as a file
or STDIN?)
The certificate to be validated (as presented in the TLS handshake) is not
present as a file, just as a data stream captured with a specialized tool,
and in the signature field I cannot see a signature, just the algorithm
used, or maybe I am blind?) whereas the OCSP response details a long
signature preceded by the word "signature:". The public key I have to use
is already in the browser's certificate, but how do I get it all down to
command line syntax?

Any help appreciated.

Cheers,

Stephan

From stebe at mailbox.org  Tue Dec 29 21:42:59 2015
From: stebe at mailbox.org (stebe at mailbox.org)
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 21:42:59 +0100 (CET)
Subject: advice please (just about the same over here)
In-Reply-To: <653946150.20246.0908b4f2-5a5f-4173-ad10-b90afa4f1ed8.open-xchange@office.mailbox.org>
References: 

 <04c7500e31814d08bf29f1586ad12da1@t1l1exchmbs-01.fchn.com>

 <56824D53.2000804@galen.org.uk>
 <653946150.20246.0908b4f2-5a5f-4173-ad10-b90afa4f1ed8.open-xchange@office.mailbox.org>
Message-ID: <1706253488.20267.4f93bbb7-49e9-4096-98e2-0e9b73c7cc94.open-xchange@office.mailbox.org>

> stebe at mailbox.org hat am 29. Dezember 2015 um 15:05 geschrieben:
> 
> 
> 
> > Bob Henson  hat am 29. Dezember 2015 um 10:07
> > geschrieben:
> > 
> > 
> > On 28/12/2015 10:22 pm, Jay Sulzberger wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Mon, 28 Dec 2015, Steve Butler  wrote:
> > > 
> 
> > If, as you imply above, you are looking for a more universal system of
> > encryption, then PGP/OpenPGP certainly isn't the one to use - it is
> > intended to be a "person to person" system used between people known
> > to
> > one another and whose keys can be countersigned with absolute
> > certainty.
> > There is already a system, albeit far from perfect, which lends itself
> > to large scale use and that is the X.509 certificate system - already
> > widely used.
> > 
> (Sorry for appending a slightly off-topic question to this thread, well,
> I
> really like the person-to person design of gpg and the WebofTrust, and
> the
> enigmail extension makes it quite easy to get along, the Enigmail
> handbook
> is written in a clear and concise manner suited for beginners as well as
> for more technical users...whenever you need a free German translation,
> knock on my door!)
> 
> By the way, talking about the X509 certificate system, which is the
> exact
> command line syntax to verify (using openssl, I guess) a given
> certificate's signature by using the public key of the certificate that
> has issued the certificate to be verified? 

Resolved. I have found the specific command line syntax. And sorry (to the
author/translator), there IS a German Enigmail handbook translation. I
only use the English original and I've never taken a look at the German
version.

A nice New Year's eve to everyone

Stebe

From wk at gnupg.org  Wed Dec 30 21:55:49 2015
From: wk at gnupg.org (Werner Koch)
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 21:55:49 +0100
Subject: General error when creating keypair
In-Reply-To:  (Francis Le
 Roy's message of "Tue, 29 Dec 2015 12:24:26 +0100")
References: 
Message-ID: <87poxnmzai.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de>

On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 12:24, thecissou98 at hotmail.fr said:

>     gpgme_set_global_flag("debug", "9");
>     gpgme_set_global_flag("disable-gpgconf","1");
>     gpgme_set_global_flag("gpg-name","gpgconf");

Why are you using these gobal flags?  They are only useful in some
certain environments.

Disabling gpgconf and chnaging the name of gpg to gppconf is definitely
not a good ideas.  c+p error?  Remove all these flags.

>     if(err!=GPG_ERR_NO_ERROR) return err;

BTW, using

      if (err) return err;

is much easier to read.

Shalom-Salam,

   Werner

-- 
Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

From david at gbenet.com  Thu Dec 31 02:18:15 2015
From: david at gbenet.com (david at gbenet.com)
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 09:18:15 +0800
Subject: Ian Murdock
Message-ID: <56848257.2090005@gbenet.com>

Apparently the founder of the Debian project, Ian Murdock, has died
[1]. There is some interesting discussion on Reddit, especially the link
to his last tweets [2].

This is very sad news, especially given the alleged circumstances.

[1] https://blog.docker.com/2015/12/ian-murdock/
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/3ytdsi/ian_murdock_creator_of_debian_has_died/

David

-- 
?See the sanity of the man! No gods, no angels, no demons, no body. Nothing of the
kind.Stern, sane,every brain-cell perfect and complete even at the moment of death. No
delusion.? https://linuxcounter.net/user/512854.html - http://gbenet.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0xAAD8C47D.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 5054 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 