Hey guys,
Having a little gpg issue I was wondering if someone could help me with.
A friend of mine sent me an encrypted message. So I searched online and found a a set of keys that correspond with his email address. And imported them. But when I go to decrypt the message, this is what I get:
[root@ops:~] #gpg --decrypt roger-message gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 9617EA5C, created 2014-10-01 "Roger Sherman rsherman@viddler.com" *gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available*
Here's a listing of keys that shows his key imported:
[root@ops:~] #gpg --list-keys /root/.gnupg/pubring.gpg ------------------------ pub 1024D/F186197B 2010-11-30 uid Tim Dunphy bluethundr@gmail.com sub 2048g/B712B288 2010-11-30 Tim Dunphy bluethundr@gmail.com
*pub 2048R/9E0AD649 2014-10-01 [expires: 2016-10-01]* *uid Roger Sherman <rsherman@viddler.com rsherman@viddler.com>* *sub 2048R/9617EA5C 2014-10-01 [expires: 2016-10-01]*
So maybe I just didn't import the right key? Or do you think the message wasn't sent correctly? Who's the dummy here? Me or him? :)
Thanks Tim
Hey guys,
Having a little gpg issue I was wondering if someone could help me with.
A friend of mine sent me an encrypted message. So I searched online and found a a set of keys that correspond with his email address. And imported them. But when I go to decrypt the message, this is what I get:
[root@ops:~] #gpg --decrypt roger-message gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 9617EA5C, created 2014-10-01 "Roger Sherman rsherman@viddler.com" *gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available*
Here's a listing of keys that shows his key imported:
[root@ops:~] #gpg --list-keys /root/.gnupg/pubring.gpg
pub 1024D/F186197B 2010-11-30 uid Tim Dunphy bluethundr@gmail.com sub 2048g/B712B288 2010-11-30 Tim Dunphy bluethundr@gmail.com
*pub 2048R/9E0AD649 2014-10-01 [expires: 2016-10-01]* *uid Roger Sherman <rsherman@viddler.com rsherman@viddler.com>* *sub 2048R/9617EA5C 2014-10-01 [expires: 2016-10-01]*
So maybe I just didn't import the right key? Or do you think the message wasn't sent correctly? Who's the dummy here? Me or him? :)
Thanks Tim
-- GPG me!!
gpg --keyserver pool.sks-keyservers.net --recv-keys F186197B
I haven't messed with gpg for a while but it seems to me that the message was encrypted with the worng key. In other words for you (Tim) to be able to decrypt the message uaing your private key Roger should have encrypted it with your public key. You should not have had to import Rogers keys. However if had needed to verify Rogers signature you would need his public key(s).
On 10/01/2014 04:58 PM, Tim Dunphy wrote:
Hey guys,
Having a little gpg issue I was wondering if someone could help me with.
A friend of mine sent me an encrypted message. So I searched online and found a a set of keys that correspond with his email address. And imported them. But when I go to decrypt the message, this is what I get:
[root@ops:~] #gpg --decrypt roger-message gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 9617EA5C, created 2014-10-01 "Roger Sherman rsherman@viddler.com" *gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available*
<snip>
So maybe I just didn't import the right key? Or do you think the message wasn't sent correctly? Who's the dummy here? Me or him? :)
looks like he encrypted with HIS public key. So you need his private key to decrypt, obviously you don't have that. I believe it's the other way around: he should encrpyt with your public key, then you are the only person capable of decrypting (with your private key).
On 10/01/2014 05:16 PM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 04:58 PM, Tim Dunphy wrote:
Hey guys,
Having a little gpg issue I was wondering if someone could help me with.
A friend of mine sent me an encrypted message. So I searched online and found a a set of keys that correspond with his email address. And imported them. But when I go to decrypt the message, this is what I get:
[root@ops:~] #gpg --decrypt roger-message gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 9617EA5C, created 2014-10-01 "Roger Sherman rsherman@viddler.com" *gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available*
<snip> > So maybe I just didn't import the right key? Or do you think the message > wasn't sent correctly? Who's the dummy here? Me or him? :)
looks like he encrypted with HIS public key. So you need his private key to decrypt, obviously you don't have that. I believe it's the other way around: he should encrpyt with your public key, then you are the only person capable of decrypting (with your private key).
BTW what would be the point of encrypting, if anyone can just grab a key online and decrypt? :-)
On Wed, October 1, 2014 10:19 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 05:16 PM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 04:58 PM, Tim Dunphy wrote:
Hey guys,
Having a little gpg issue I was wondering if someone could help me with.
A friend of mine sent me an encrypted message. So I searched online and found a a set of keys that correspond with his email address. And imported them. But when I go to decrypt the message, this is what I get:
[root@ops:~] #gpg --decrypt roger-message gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 9617EA5C, created 2014-10-01 "Roger Sherman rsherman@viddler.com" *gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available*
<snip> > So maybe I just didn't import the right key? Or do you think the > message > wasn't sent correctly? Who's the dummy here? Me or him? :)
looks like he encrypted with HIS public key. So you need his private key to decrypt, obviously you don't have that. I believe it's the other way around: he should encrpyt with your public key, then you are the only person capable of decrypting (with your private key).
BTW what would be the point of encrypting, if anyone can just grab a key online and decrypt? :-)
If you can decrypt his message with his public key, this tells you that the person who has access to secret key of the pair was the one who encrypted the message. This ensures that you know that he is the one who indeed sent this message.
Somebody, correct me...
Valeri
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On 2014-10-01 12:07 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
Somebody, correct me...
It also provides some measure of assurance that tampering of the content has not occurred between time of sending and time of decryption, though just *signing* it with the private key (without also encrypting) should accomplish that as well.
Still, just think if the NSA/et al had to spend all their 'bot-net time brute forcing millions of encrypted 'everyday' emails.
On 10/01/2014 06:20 PM, Darr247 wrote:
On 2014-10-01 12:07 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
Somebody, correct me...
It also provides some measure of assurance that tampering of the content has not occurred between time of sending and time of decryption, though just *signing* it with the private key (without also encrypting) should accomplish that as well.
it's two different processes and they use different keys: you sign a message using your private key, but you encrypt a message using the recipient's public key.
On 10/01/2014 06:07 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, October 1, 2014 10:19 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 05:16 PM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 04:58 PM, Tim Dunphy wrote:
Hey guys,
Having a little gpg issue I was wondering if someone could help me with.
A friend of mine sent me an encrypted message. So I searched online and found a a set of keys that correspond with his email address. And imported them. But when I go to decrypt the message, this is what I get:
[root@ops:~] #gpg --decrypt roger-message gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 9617EA5C, created 2014-10-01 "Roger Sherman rsherman@viddler.com" *gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available*
<snip> > So maybe I just didn't import the right key? Or do you think the > message > wasn't sent correctly? Who's the dummy here? Me or him? :)
looks like he encrypted with HIS public key. So you need his private key to decrypt, obviously you don't have that. I believe it's the other way around: he should encrpyt with your public key, then you are the only person capable of decrypting (with your private key).
BTW what would be the point of encrypting, if anyone can just grab a key online and decrypt? :-)
If you can decrypt his message with his public key, this tells you that the person who has access to secret key of the pair was the one who encrypted the message. This ensures that you know that he is the one who indeed sent this message.
that is the purpose of *signing*: authenticate the sender and prevent tampering of the message.
The purpose of *encrypting* is different: make sure only the intended recipient can read (decrypt) the message.
Sometimes you do both, but you don't have to.
On Wed, October 1, 2014 11:34 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 06:07 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, October 1, 2014 10:19 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 05:16 PM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 04:58 PM, Tim Dunphy wrote:
Hey guys,
Having a little gpg issue I was wondering if someone could help me with.
A friend of mine sent me an encrypted message. So I searched online and found a a set of keys that correspond with his email address. And imported them. But when I go to decrypt the message, this is what I get:
[root@ops:~] #gpg --decrypt roger-message gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 9617EA5C, created 2014-10-01 "Roger Sherman rsherman@viddler.com" *gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available*
<snip> > So maybe I just didn't import the right key? Or do you think the > message > wasn't sent correctly? Who's the dummy here? Me or him? :)
looks like he encrypted with HIS public key. So you need his private key to decrypt, obviously you don't have that. I believe it's the other way around: he should encrpyt with your public key, then you are the only person capable of decrypting (with your private key).
BTW what would be the point of encrypting, if anyone can just grab a key online and decrypt? :-)
If you can decrypt his message with his public key, this tells you that the person who has access to secret key of the pair was the one who encrypted the message. This ensures that you know that he is the one who indeed sent this message.
that is the purpose of *signing*: authenticate the sender and prevent tampering of the message.
The purpose of *encrypting* is different: make sure only the intended recipient can read (decrypt) the message.
Sometimes you do both, but you don't have to.
Sure, I agree, but I just answered the question if encrypting with one's own secret key is nonsense, which it isn't, but normally people do what you describes, and that is the way was pgp and gpg are meant to be used... still "unusual thing" as encrypting with one's own private key isn't nonsense.
Valeri
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, October 1, 2014 11:34 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 06:07 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, October 1, 2014 10:19 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 05:16 PM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 04:58 PM, Tim Dunphy wrote:
Hey guys,
Having a little gpg issue I was wondering if someone could help me with.
A friend of mine sent me an encrypted message. So I searched online and found a a set of keys that correspond with his email address. And imported them. But when I go to decrypt the message, this is what I get:
[root@ops:~] #gpg --decrypt roger-message gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 9617EA5C, created 2014-10-01 "Roger Sherman rsherman@viddler.com" *gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available*
<snip> > So maybe I just didn't import the right key? Or do you think the > message > wasn't sent correctly? Who's the dummy here? Me or him? :)
looks like he encrypted with HIS public key. So you need his private key to decrypt, obviously you don't have that. I believe it's the other way around: he should encrpyt with your public key, then you are the only person capable of decrypting (with your private key).
BTW what would be the point of encrypting, if anyone can just grab a key online and decrypt? :-)
If you can decrypt his message with his public key, this tells you that the person who has access to secret key of the pair was the one who encrypted the message. This ensures that you know that he is the one who indeed sent this message.
that is the purpose of *signing*: authenticate the sender and prevent tampering of the message.
The purpose of *encrypting* is different: make sure only the intended recipient can read (decrypt) the message.
Sometimes you do both, but you don't have to.
Sure, I agree, but I just answered the question if encrypting with one's own secret key is nonsense, which it isn't, but normally people do what you describes, and that is the way was pgp and gpg are meant to be used... still "unusual thing" as encrypting with one's own private key isn't nonsense.
Valeri
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This thread has turned in to 'cryptography 101' on the CentOS mailing list. This is my last post...
Encrypting content (a message) with ones own secret key with the intent of privacy is pointless (or nonesense as you say). With the premise being that the 'matching' key to that secret key is, well, public or accessible to anyone. Hense no privacy as the content can be decrypted by anyone.
Encrypting a message digest or hash with ones own secret key makes perfect sense. That is the essence of a digital signature.
With the premise being that the 'matching' key to that secret key is, well, public or accessible to anyone.
Well, yeah! The PUBLIC key that you're sending the message to is accessible to anyone. But the only way to decrypt the message is with the PRIVATE key that is paired with the public key of the recipient. Not sure where you get the idea that this is insecure. The message absolutely CANNOT be decrypted by someone who does not have the private key with which the public key you're sending the message to is associated.
cryptography 101 indeed!
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Mike mike@microdel.org wrote:
On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, October 1, 2014 11:34 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 06:07 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, October 1, 2014 10:19 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 05:16 PM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 04:58 PM, Tim Dunphy wrote:
> Hey guys, > > > Having a little gpg issue I was wondering if someone could help me > with. > > A friend of mine sent me an encrypted message. So I searched > online > and > found a a set of keys that correspond with his email address. And > imported > them. But when I go to decrypt the message, this is what I get: > > [root@ops:~] #gpg --decrypt roger-message > gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 9617EA5C, created 2014-10-01 > "Roger Sherman rsherman@viddler.com" > *gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* > *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available* > > <snip>
> So maybe I just didn't import the right key? Or do you think the > message > wasn't sent correctly? Who's the dummy here? Me or him? :) >
looks like he encrypted with HIS public key. So you need his private key to decrypt, obviously you don't have that. I believe it's the other way around: he should encrpyt with your public key, then you are the only person capable of decrypting (with your private key).
BTW what would be the point of encrypting, if anyone can just grab a key online and decrypt? :-)
If you can decrypt his message with his public key, this tells you that the person who has access to secret key of the pair was the one who encrypted the message. This ensures that you know that he is the one who indeed sent this message.
that is the purpose of *signing*: authenticate the sender and prevent tampering of the message.
The purpose of *encrypting* is different: make sure only the intended recipient can read (decrypt) the message.
Sometimes you do both, but you don't have to.
Sure, I agree, but I just answered the question if encrypting with one's own secret key is nonsense, which it isn't, but normally people do what you describes, and that is the way was pgp and gpg are meant to be used... still "unusual thing" as encrypting with one's own private key isn't nonsense.
Valeri
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This thread has turned in to 'cryptography 101' on the CentOS mailing
list. This is my last post...
Encrypting content (a message) with ones own secret key with the intent of privacy is pointless (or nonesense as you say). With the premise being that the 'matching' key to that secret key is, well, public or accessible to anyone. Hense no privacy as the content can be decrypted by anyone.
Encrypting a message digest or hash with ones own secret key makes perfect sense. That is the essence of a digital signature.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Wed, October 1, 2014 12:45 pm, Tim Dunphy wrote:
With the premise being that the 'matching' key to that secret key is, well, public or accessible to anyone.
Well, yeah! The PUBLIC key that you're sending the message to is accessible to anyone. But the only way to decrypt the message is with the PRIVATE key that is paired with the public key of the recipient. Not sure where you get the idea that this is insecure. The message absolutely CANNOT be decrypted by someone who does not have the private key with which the public key you're sending the message to is associated.
cryptography 101 indeed!
not meaning to object, just a note:
whatever is encrypted with public key can be decrypted with secret key
whatever is encrypted with secret key can be decrypted with public key
(i.e. mathematically keys in a pair are equivalent, choice which to use as a secret key is arbitrary).
Valeri
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Mike mike@microdel.org wrote:
On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, October 1, 2014 11:34 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 06:07 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, October 1, 2014 10:19 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 05:16 PM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
> On 10/01/2014 04:58 PM, Tim Dunphy wrote: > >> Hey guys, >> >> >> Having a little gpg issue I was wondering if someone could help >> me >> with. >> >> A friend of mine sent me an encrypted message. So I searched >> online >> and >> found a a set of keys that correspond with his email address. And >> imported >> them. But when I go to decrypt the message, this is what I get: >> >> [root@ops:~] #gpg --decrypt roger-message >> gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 9617EA5C, created >> 2014-10-01 >> "Roger Sherman rsherman@viddler.com" >> *gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* >> *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available* >> >> <snip> > >> So maybe I just didn't import the right key? Or do you think the >> message >> wasn't sent correctly? Who's the dummy here? Me or him? :) >> > > looks like he encrypted with HIS public key. So you need his > private > key > to decrypt, obviously you don't have that. > I believe it's the other way around: he should encrpyt with your > public > key, then you are the only person capable of decrypting (with your > private key). >
BTW what would be the point of encrypting, if anyone can just grab a key online and decrypt? :-)
If you can decrypt his message with his public key, this tells you that the person who has access to secret key of the pair was the one who encrypted the message. This ensures that you know that he is the one who indeed sent this message.
that is the purpose of *signing*: authenticate the sender and prevent tampering of the message.
The purpose of *encrypting* is different: make sure only the intended recipient can read (decrypt) the message.
Sometimes you do both, but you don't have to.
Sure, I agree, but I just answered the question if encrypting with one's own secret key is nonsense, which it isn't, but normally people do what you describes, and that is the way was pgp and gpg are meant to be used... still "unusual thing" as encrypting with one's own private key isn't nonsense.
Valeri
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This thread has turned in to 'cryptography 101' on the CentOS mailing
list. This is my last post...
Encrypting content (a message) with ones own secret key with the intent of privacy is pointless (or nonesense as you say). With the premise being that the 'matching' key to that secret key is, well, public or accessible to anyone. Hense no privacy as the content can be decrypted by anyone.
Encrypting a message digest or hash with ones own secret key makes perfect sense. That is the essence of a digital signature.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
-- GPG me!!
gpg --keyserver pool.sks-keyservers.net --recv-keys F186197B _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Wed, October 1, 2014 12:29 pm, Mike wrote:
On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, October 1, 2014 11:34 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 06:07 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, October 1, 2014 10:19 am, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 05:16 PM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
On 10/01/2014 04:58 PM, Tim Dunphy wrote: > Hey guys, > > > Having a little gpg issue I was wondering if someone could help > me > with. > > A friend of mine sent me an encrypted message. So I searched > online > and > found a a set of keys that correspond with his email address. And > imported > them. But when I go to decrypt the message, this is what I get: > > [root@ops:~] #gpg --decrypt roger-message > gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID 9617EA5C, created > 2014-10-01 > "Roger Sherman rsherman@viddler.com" > *gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* > *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available* >
<snip> > So maybe I just didn't import the right key? Or do you think the > message > wasn't sent correctly? Who's the dummy here? Me or him? :)
looks like he encrypted with HIS public key. So you need his private key to decrypt, obviously you don't have that. I believe it's the other way around: he should encrpyt with your public key, then you are the only person capable of decrypting (with your private key).
BTW what would be the point of encrypting, if anyone can just grab a key online and decrypt? :-)
If you can decrypt his message with his public key, this tells you that the person who has access to secret key of the pair was the one who encrypted the message. This ensures that you know that he is the one who indeed sent this message.
that is the purpose of *signing*: authenticate the sender and prevent tampering of the message.
The purpose of *encrypting* is different: make sure only the intended recipient can read (decrypt) the message.
Sometimes you do both, but you don't have to.
Sure, I agree, but I just answered the question if encrypting with one's own secret key is nonsense, which it isn't, but normally people do what you describes, and that is the way was pgp and gpg are meant to be used... still "unusual thing" as encrypting with one's own private key isn't nonsense.
Valeri
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This thread has turned in to 'cryptography 101' on the CentOS mailing list. This is my last post...
Encrypting content (a message) with ones own secret key with the intent of privacy is pointless (or nonesense as you say).
No, it was NOT privacy here that can be the goal, but knowledge that the message indeed comes from the one who has access to secret key. (and I was just answering someone's question if this is at all nonsense, not suggesting to use pgp/gpg this way)
In general (not meaning 101 encryption class, I'm not that ambitious), key pair (asymmetric) encryption is:
There is a pair of keys: A and B. Whatever is encrypted with key A can be decrypted with key B. And vice versa, whatever is encrypted with key B can be decrypted with key A. In that respect keys are equivalent (only once designated secret key should stay such forever).
Unusual way of encrypting with one's own secret key is not a nonsense, and serves the same goal as digital signature does (the last being preferable IMHO...). If you go to wikipedia article Public-key_cryptography you will find this use there, it is in the section titled "Inverse Public Key Encryption".
So, what is less usual or irregular is not total nonsense.
Cryptologists (or mathematicians) - you have last word ! (after which we - all us others - will shut up ;-)
Valeri
With the premise being that the 'matching' key to that secret key is, well, public or accessible to anyone. Hense no privacy as the content can be decrypted by anyone.
Encrypting a message digest or hash with ones own secret key makes perfect sense. That is the essence of a digital signature. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From: Valeri Galtsev galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu
Cryptologists (or mathematicians) - you have last word ! (after which we - all us others - will shut up ;-)
No, the FBI director has the last word: "Do not side with paedophiles and terrorists and stop using encryption! Think of the children!"
JD
*gpg: encrypted with RSA key, ID 9A41C766* *gpg: decryption failed: secret key not available*
You may have the other parties public key, but it seems that the party sending you messages used the wrong public key for you to encrypt the message, key ID 9A41C766 does not correspond to your private key. Maybe they intended to send the message to someone else or maybe that corresponds to and old version of your key that they had on their keyring?
— Mark Tinberg, System Administrator Division of Information Technology - Network Services University of Wisconsin - Madison mark.tinberg@wisc.edu
-
Darr247 -
John Doe -
Mark Tinberg -
Mike -
Nicolas Thierry-Mieg -
Tim Dunphy -
Valeri Galtsev