gedit and PGP encryption alternative for Brigantia
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios
Hello. In the past, I encrypted and signed plain text in gedit thanks to the Seahorse plugins. Is there an alternative for Trisquel 5.5?
If you use emacs, you can do all of that transparently by saving files with a .gpg extension.
В 22:29 +0200 на 09.08.2012 (чт), name at domain написа:
> Hello. In the past, I encrypted and signed plain text in gedit thanks to the
> Seahorse plugins. Is there an alternative for Trisquel 5.5?
As far as I remember Nautilus used to have encrypt functionality in the
right-click context menu. Anybody knows what happened to that or did I
imagined it? That would have been an option.
The other is manually encrypting from terminal:
$ gpp -e -r recipient-key@some-address file
Supports multiple -r options for multiple recipients. This produces
file.gpg. Probably the forum software will hide the recipient part,
because it looks like an e-mail address. It is
recipient-key_at_some-address. Replace the _at_ with the at symbol - @.
Decrypting is easy as well:
$ gpg -d file.gpg > decrypted_file
As akirashinigami said, if you use Emacs it can do encryption for you.
If you have the EasyPG Assistant package and put the following line in
the header of the file, Emacs will automatically encrypt files when they
are saved:
;-*- epa-file-ecrypt-to: ("recipient-key-id") -*-
> As akirashinigami said, if you use Emacs it can do encryption for you.
Why emacs doesn't need my passphrase for ciphering?? I save a .gpg without
changing any configuration file, I selected a key "as recipient" and it
was ciphered. For deciphering, yes, I needed my passprhase. Is it a kind
of ciphering where the people who encrypt doesn't need a key? I didn't
know about it. But it is useful when identification is not important, and
does you more anonymous.
> Why emacs doesn't need my passphrase for ciphering?? I save a .gpg without
> changing any configuration file, I selected a key "as recipient" and it
> was ciphered. For deciphering, yes, I needed my passprhase. Is it a kind
> of ciphering where the people who encrypt doesn't need a key? I didn't
> know about it. But it is useful when identification is not important, and
> does you more anonymous.
The typical use of GPG encryption is when Alice sends a message to Bob,
she needs to be able to encrypt it without knowing Bob's private key
(she knows only the public one), while only Bob (i.e. someone having his
private key) might be able to decrypt it. (The message would be
typically also signed, so Bob knows that it's from Alice.) Encryption
and signature verification are done using the public key, while
decryption and signing use the private one. (Technically a separate
random symmetric key is encrypted instead of the message, one of the
reasons for this are much faster operations than with popular asymmetric
algorithms.) You can use symmetric encryption directly if you can share
a secret key with the receipient (e.g. when sending messages for
yourself).
Thank you! Emacs + EasyPG suits my needs.
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios