PGP 5.x and GnuPG

L. Sassaman
Thu, 16 Mar 2000 19:40:37 -0800 (PST)

Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Trevor Smith wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 17:50:50 -0800 (PST), L. Sassaman wrote:
> >On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Trevor Smith wrote:
> >
> >> 2. Can PGP 5.x encrypt messages using a public key generated by
> >> GnuPG?
> >
> >If is is a v3 key.
> OK, next question: what the heck is a v3 key? And a v4 key (referred
> to later in your reply)?
> >From the context above, it appears a v3 key is something produced by
> GnuPG. But GnuPG is only at release level 1.0.1, correct?
"Version 3 Key". PGP 5 produced (and could only handle) v3 keys. PGP 6 and up produces v4 keys, as well as GPG. GPG has the option to produce only v3 keys, for backwards compatability with PGP5.
> >The reason is mainly the v3 vs. v4 key types. Note that PGP5 is not
> >OpenPGP compliant.
> Weird. Doesn't the OpenPGP RFC start by saying that OpenPGP is a
> proposed standard based on PGP 5.0? How did PGP5 manage not to comply
> with the RFC based on it?
Well, think about this. PGP5 came first. OpenPGP is based on PGP5, but enhances and changes some things. Now PGP5 is not OpenPGP compliant. PGP6 and GPG are both based on OpenPGP. Each doesn't totally conform to the OpenPGP standard "to the T", but are, for the most part, OpenPGP compliant. They came after the RFC. It would have been hard for the PGP5 devel team to make a product intended to conform with an RFC that hadn't yet been written. :) - --Len. __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "All of the chaos Technology Consultant | Makes perfect sense..." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger:// | --Joe Diffie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.1c (GNU/Linux) Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE40ak7PYrxsgmsCmoRAsdzAJsHOpnXGyUxP/wYBNk30ieibbbBEgCdGZz/ efE3IiA0PEmIziwIfvlDkek= =SpSQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----