GPA - unsupported certificate
peter at digitalbrains.com
Tue Dec 8 13:16:29 CET 2015
On 08/12/15 00:00, Dark Penguin wrote:
> Erm... sorry, I am still not very good with understanding the bug
> report flow; I would have checked the Debian GPA bug page before
> writing here if I knew about its existence. ^_^' And yes, here it is,
> my "Unsupported certificate" bug!..
No problem, it's what mailing lists are for: to give pointers in the
> I'm not sure if this idea makes sense, but maybe it would be easy to
> add a check on the version of said gpg-agent before attempting to use
I know certain recent versions of GnuPG complain and warn about the
hijacking, but that is during usage on the terminal.
> On one side, GPA is probably supposed to work with whatever
> GPG_AGENT_INFO is set to
No, this variable is part of the internal architecture of GnuPG and
should be set to the gpg-agent that is part of the installed version of
GnuPG. This is why I use the term "hijack", rather than something like
"provide an alternative service". It has never been intended that other
software packages use this variable and start imitating internal parts
> on the other side, if all the other software is fine working with
> GNOME Keyring and only GPA needs "only its own" gpg-agent
Again, no. Lots of programs get vague problems. It's just that it used
to be that GNOME Keyring said "those problems are in GnuPG", whereas the
GnuPG project said "those problems are caused by GNOME Keyring breaking
our software". The result is that nobody fixed it. I hope that when
Debian Stretch is released, we can finally put this behind us, as the
problem has been fixed in recent versions that are unfortunately too
recent for Jessie AFAIK.
> maybe it would make sense to disregard GPG_AGENT_INFO if it points to
> GNOME Keyring one, or maybe even disregard it always, or maybe even
> have GPA use another fixed path to always connect to "our"
GnuPG 2.1 already always uses a fixed path and disregards the variable.
And recent GnuPG 2.0 versions already warn about the hijack. The problem
is that two software projects want opposite things; this would lead to
an arms race. But fortunately, it will all go away when distributions
start using recent versions of the software, as the issue has finally
Oh, by the way, the functionality that GNOME Keyring is providing is
that it offers the option of unlocking your GnuPG keys when you log in.
I've never understood why this is so darn important. Without GNOME
Keyring, you would type two passphrases per login session: once to
login, and for the second time when you use your GnuPG key for the first
time. The gpg-agent can then keep the key unlocked for the rest of the
time if you want it to. With GNOME Keyring, it is reduced to one
passphrase: your login passphrase. Some might say that's a 50% gain, I
say it is the smallest possible gain: you gain one less
passphrase-entering moment per session. Whooptie-friggin'-doo. I don't
I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail.
You can send me encrypted mail if you want some privacy.
My key is available at <http://digitalbrains.com/2012/openpgp-key-peter>
More information about the Gnupg-users