- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] Digitally signed e-mails

by Andy Stewart

On Monday 24 November 2003 8:43 am, mlong(a)datalong.com wrote: > I smell a topic for a WLUG meeting... :) > This is clearly not a topic on which I can speak. I'm soliciting volunteers who might like to address WLUG on this topic. Any takers for the January meeting? Later, Andy -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA USA http://www.wlug.org

Nov. 24, 2003

Re: [Wlug] Digitally signed e-mails

by mlong＠datalong.com

I smell a topic for a WLUG meeting... :) >> >> My question is this: how do I get someone's public key ? > > There are public key servers that you can grab the keys from, assuming > that the people uploaded the keys. The default config file for gnupg > specifies a few commented out, so just uncomment one of them for use. >>From there, you use "gpg --recv-key keyid" from the commandline to grab > it. > > You can also have the key e-mail to you, find it on a website, or any > other number of ways that you get any time of file from someone. >

Nov. 24, 2003

Re: [Wlug] Digitally signed e-mails

by Gregory Boyce

On Sun, 2003-11-23 at 14:00, Andy Stewart wrote: > HI everybody, > > While I was cleaning out my inbox e-mail folder, I ran across several e-mails > from WLUG members which were digitally signed. I've recently upgraded to > SuSE 9.0 and the 'new' version of KDE's Kmail flags these e-mails in bright > yellow. Kmail is telling me that I don't have the senders public key > available, and thus it isn't sure that the mail actually camed from the > claimed sender. > > My question is this: how do I get someone's public key ? There are public key servers that you can grab the keys from, assuming that the people uploaded the keys. The default config file for gnupg specifies a few commented out, so just uncomment one of them for use. >From there, you use "gpg --recv-key keyid" from the commandline to grab it. You can also have the key e-mail to you, find it on a website, or any other number of ways that you get any time of file from someone. > Further, that brings up another question in this space: > > 1) How do I know that the public key I'm given really belongs to the person > giving it ? Short of receiving it in person, and assuming that the person > isn't an imposter, I suppose I eventually have to limit my level of paranoia > to some level of trust. :-) There are two main methods. Either verify the fingerprint of the key itself with the owner of the key in a situation where you know for a fact that it is the person. The other method is a web of trust. Basically, you verify someone's key and specify that you trust the key. Then, any key that they have verified and signed will be available to you as signed as well. Just be sure that the person you've chosen to trust is trustworthy security-wise. If they sign a key as legit that they did not verify, then you could have a bad key. the website for gpg has more information: http://www.gnupg.org/ -- Gregory Boyce <gboyce(a)badbelly.com>

Nov. 23, 2003

Digitally signed e-mails

by Andy Stewart

HI everybody, While I was cleaning out my inbox e-mail folder, I ran across several e-mails from WLUG members which were digitally signed. I've recently upgraded to SuSE 9.0 and the 'new' version of KDE's Kmail flags these e-mails in bright yellow. Kmail is telling me that I don't have the senders public key available, and thus it isn't sure that the mail actually camed from the claimed sender. My question is this: how do I get someone's public key ? Further, that brings up another question in this space: 1) How do I know that the public key I'm given really belongs to the person giving it ? Short of receiving it in person, and assuming that the person isn't an imposter, I suppose I eventually have to limit my level of paranoia to some level of trust. :-) Thanks, Andy -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA USA http://www.wlug.org

Nov. 23, 2003

Re: [Wlug] HMM, no conspiracy after all.

by Steve Freitag

> It seems like it may not be a conspiracy after all. In a search engine my personal preference is for quality of results rather then quantity. If what I am looking for shows up on the first page I'm happy... who wants to wade through a few million results any how. :-) So, try a search of - linux apache - on msn.com and notice that the first six results are about the slapper worm. Hmm...

Nov. 17, 2003

Re: [Wlug] HMM, no conspiracy after all.

by Andy Stewart

On Monday 17 November 2003 12:03 am, Arturo Sedo wrote: > It seems like it may not be a conspiracy after all. Try the advanced search with all words and see how many hits you find. Andy -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA USA http://www.wlug.org

Nov. 17, 2003

HMM, no conspiracy after all.

by Arturo Sedo

It seems like it may not be a conspiracy after all. Here are some searches I did followed by the resulting number of hits. Search Result ------ ------- mac OS x 48 windows xp 279 Linux 365 windows f*cking sucks 40464 bill gates genius 43093 Conclusion: The msn search engine may actually suck that badly! From: Arturo Sedo <postgres(a)sedo.net> To: WLUG <wlug(a)mail.wlug.org>, arturo_sedo(a)raytheon.com Subject: Interesting slashdot article. I didn't think it would be true. It was! Date: 16 Nov 2003 22:55:02 -0500 Here's an exercise for all to try. Search Google for Linux Windows. That gets you about 14 million pages, even with the English preference or filter turned on. Now, go to msn.com and search the Microsoft way for the same two words. You get exactly 18 pages. The word censorship doesn't seem to do justice to what Microsoft has done to a msn user who wants to compare Linux with Windows, does it? According to an MSN's Internet search, the word linux only appears 365 documents. In the entire internet! No wonder they wanted to buy google. Arturo -- Arturo Sedo <postgres(a)sedo.net>

Nov. 17, 2003

Interesting slashdot article. I didn't think it would be true. It was!

by Arturo Sedo

Here's an exercise for all to try. Search Google for Linux Windows. That gets you about 14 million pages, even with the English preference or filter turned on. Now, go to msn.com and search the Microsoft way for the same two words. You get exactly 18 pages. The word censorship doesn't seem to do justice to what Microsoft has done to a msn user who wants to compare Linux with Windows, does it? According to an MSN's Internet search, the word linux only appears 365 documents. In the entire internet! No wonder they wanted to buy google. Arturo -- Arturo Sedo <postgres(a)sedo.net>

Nov. 17, 2003

Re: [Wlug] Revolution OS

by Andy Stewart

On Friday 14 November 2003 4:31 pm, swillis(a)WPI.EDU wrote: > The Worcester Area Student Chapter of the ACM based at WPI will be showing > the film "Revolution OS" (www.revolution-os.com) Friday the 21st at 7:30pm > in Fuller Auditorium, on the WPI campus. We would like to invite all > those in the Worcester Linux Users' Group to join us to watch this film. > If you are unable to make this showing, we'll be showing this at the regularly scheduled WLUG meeting on Thursday, December 11th at 7:00 PM. However you do it, try to get to see this video, its really good ! > The film is a documentary about Linux and the whole open-source/free > software movement. "REVOLUTION OS features interviews with Linus > Torvalds, Richard Stallman, Bruce Perens, Eric Raymond, Brian Behlendorf, > Michael Tiemann, Larry Augustin, Frank Hecker, and Rob Malda. To view the > trailer or the first eight minutes go to the ifilm website for REVOLUTION > OS." -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA USA http://www.wlug.org

Nov. 15, 2003

Re: [Wlug] Debian to RH 9 Migration

by Keith Wright

> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Chuck Noyes wrote: <Debian to RedHat "upgrade?"> > > Has anyone tried this? I don't what version of Debian is > > currently being used. Any guidelines for this kind of migration. Well, I had all kinds of trouble upgrading from RH 7.1 to 9, and am about to upgrade from Redhat to Debian instead. RH 9 will not install with less than 64Meg of RAM (approximately). A machine that had been running old RH, Suse, or Debian for years (a "scratch" machine I tried various things on) needed to have new RAM before RH 9 could be installed. Also some versions of RH 9 (e.g. one from a Cheapbytes disk of October vintage) will not boot at all on some CPU's (e.g. Cyrix) I submitted a bug report on this a month ago and so far there is no indication that anyone at RH has even read it. For full story, See: http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla Bug number 107806, Kernel oops on boot install If it boots at all, it seems to work well enough. > From: Karl Hiramoto <karl(a)zoop.org> > > Upgrade to some other distro. Of course, that distro also comes "WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE". > Guideline: > 1. make a backup > 2. install new distro > 3. restore the files that you need. That's how I would upgrade even from old Redhat to new Redhat. You probably want ext3, and you really can't upgrade in place from ext2. -- Keith ---- Prepratory to anything else Mr Bloom brushed off the greater bulk of the shavings and handed Stephen the hat and ashplant and bucked him up generally in orthodox Samaritan fashion, which he very badly needed. > -- James Joyce, "Ulysses"

Nov. 15, 2003