# Tag Info

12

If Bob does NOT care to check signatures (as in the question), Eve can send ANY message she wants to Bob pretending to be Alice, including but not limited to messages Eve got from Alice; all Eve needs is Bob's public key (which, as the name implies, is assumed public knowledge thus known to Eve) and straight use of PGP. Therefore the right question is: Can ...

6

OpenPGP as defined by RFC 4880 knows two different encodings. Binary encoding Obviously, there is no reasonable limitation to an (ASCII) character subset in binary encoding. Radix 64 Radix 64 is also often entitled ASCII armored. In the end, it is a base64 encoding with a checksum. The content may consist of [a-zA-Y0-0+/=]. ASCII-armored OpenPGP ...

6

So your protocol goes like this: Alice generates a key pair $(a_{priv}, a_{pub})$ and sends $a_{pub}$ to Bob. Bob generates a key pair $(b_{priv}, b_{pub})$ and sends $b_{pub}$ to Alice. Alice generates a message $m$ and sends $Enc(Sign(m, a_{priv}), b_{pub})$ (or $Sign(Enc(m, b_{pub}), a_{priv})$, I'm not sure which of both is usually used by PGP) to Bob. ...

5

There are a few pitfalls: File name integrity: signing files one at a time signs the contents of the files. It (typically) does not protect the file names from tampering. This could be disastrous in some situations (e.g. an attacker could change blacklist.txt to whitelist.txt). Set membership integrity: signing individual files does not prevent adding or ...

2

The usual recommendation is ECDSA, or if you need a really short signature, BLS. See “Security.SE: What asymetric scheme provides the shortest signature, while being secure?”, “Security.SE: How to encrypt a short string to a short ciphertext using an asymmetric encryption?”, and “Crypto.SE: Short length asymmetric encryption?” for details. ECDSA should ...

2

From my recent experience, it's not always compatible. Using the latest version of GnuPG and Symantec PGP, I was able to confirm at least the fact that a 16384-bit RSA key pair (with 4096-bit subkeys) generated in GnuPG will not be usable in Symantec PGP. All of the cipher, hash algorithm, and compression preferences will be displayed as none, the expiry ...

2

When creating a signed and encrypted PGP message, you only use your own keypair in the signing phase -- it's not used when encrypting the message (that only uses the recipient's public key). The recipient uses their own keypair only to decrypt the message, not to verify the signature. The two keypairs don't interact at all; that's why they don't have to be ...

1

As mentioned this is a very broad question, so please forgive me for not going into any great depth on each point. There are a few ways to beat encryption. One way is to attack the actual math of the cryptography: for PGP that would involve cracking RSA, which would involve finding a way to solve the discrete log problem. This is the hardest method, but ...

1

Signing files individually will create independent signatures for the contents (not filename) of each file. A potential downfall here is that the items could be removed or renamed without detection. Let's say, for example, the files to be signed are alice-invoice, bob-invoice, and chris-invoice. If each file is individually signed, and bob-invoice is ...

1

You can use the Web tool pgpdump, available at this address http://www.pgpdump.net/ or the same tool ( http://www.mew.org/~kazu/proj/pgpdump/en/) to install on your pc. This latter is to use if you are poking with your real secret key. At the moment I don't remember if the tool outputs in hex or dec, but you can easily convert to your favourite Base ...

1

GPG is an implementation of OpenPGP, which is a higher level protocol than e.g. mcrypt. So use GPG for PGP compatibility and mcrypt or related libraries for more direct - lower level - access to algorithms. AES is Rijndael for a block size of 128 bits and the 128, 192 or 256 bit key sizes. So you are OK there. Learn about modes of operation and something ...

1

In the case of emails your solution is not really practical. The problem is that the sender of an email uses the public key whereas the receiver should have the secret key. This means that whenever somebody wants to send you an email (and therefore generate a new key) you have to be online or you have to provide a set of pre-computed key pairs. If multiple ...

1

This procedure, also called signing a message, does not encrypt the message itself, thus does not ensure it cannot be read by others. Instead, a hash sum of the message is encrypted using the private key. For verifying, the recipient again calculates the hash sum of the message, and decrypts the hash sum calculated by the sender using the sender's public ...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible