Have you wondered about using cryptography, but found it too confusing? Are complicated software packages, passphrases, keys, key rings, certificates and fingerprints too daunting?
You don't need all that. With no prior experience and nothing to remember, GnuPG can do basic and immediately useful cryptography. GnuPG even may be installed on your Linux system already.
The GnuPG is the GNU Project's implementation of the OpenPGP standard. Also known as the Gnu Privacy Guard, it is a sophisticated public key cryptosystem with more than 70 command-line options, plus an internal command-line and menu environment. It has been ported to several operating systems and has precompiled binaries available from the GnuPG Web site (see the on-line Resources). Like all GNU software, it can be used freely under the GNU General Public License.
The OpenPGP standard, RFC 2440, is based on the Pretty Good Privacy system developed by Phil Zimmermann in 1991. OpenPGP is also the basis for commercial products on even more operating systems. An OpenPGP system is the most common file encryption system you will encounter.
First, let's begin with some GnuPG features that don't need a passphrase. After that, we'll choose a passphrase and use it to encrypt something. Note that GnuPG is the name of the software, but the name of the command is gpg.
Make sure GnuPG is installed and in your path:
You should get something like this:
gpg (GnuPG) 1.4.1 Copyright (C) 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions. See the file COPYING for details. Home: ~/.gnupg Supported algorithms: Pubkey: RSA, RSA-E, RSA-S, ELG-E, DSA Cipher: 3DES, CAST5, BLOWFISH, AES, AES192, AES256, TWOFISH Hash: MD5, SHA1, RIPEMD160, SHA256, SHA384, SHA512 Compression: Uncompressed, ZIP, ZLIB, BZIP2
The version number, date and other details may vary. The examples shown in this article should work for most current and future versions of GnuPG.
You might get something like this:
gpg: /home/you/.gnupg: directory created gpg: new configuration file `/home/you/.gnupg/gpg.conf' ↪created gpg: WARNING: options in `/home/you/.gnupg/gpg.conf' ↪are not yet active during this run gpg: keyring `/home/you/.gnupg/secring.gpg' created gpg: keyring `/home/you/.gnupg/pubring.gpg' created gpg: processing message failed: eof
This is perfectly normal the first time you run GnuPG. If it doesn't happen, it simply means you've run GnuPG before, or your .gnupg directory already exists.
Most e-mail programs support file attachments, but command-line e-mail programs, such as /bin/mail, don't. Sometimes it's more convenient to keep all the data in the message body. But binary files must be ASCII-encoded to prevent them from being corrupted in transit.
You may have tried to use uuencode and found it confusing or that it didn't work. Not all systems have a command-line MIME encoder. However, GnuPG has an ASCII-encoding option very similar to MIME, but without all the complexity, overhead and features.
To wrap a file in PGP ASCII armor, type:
$ gpg --enarmor < filename.bin > filename.txt
To unwrap a file already in PGP ASCII armor, type:
$ gpg --dearmor < filename.txt > filename.bin
Warning: despite the name, the OpenPGP ASCII armor has absolutely no security. If you do want security and data compression, see the Quick and Clean Encryption section below and use a good passphrase.
Do you suspect a file you just received is corrupted? Traditionally, the sum or cksum command is run over the file before and after it was sent and the outputs are compared. But there are three different incompatible versions of these commands, and even the same version can produce completely different output on different machines due to processor endian issues. Even worse, sometimes they won't even detect corrupted files. By chance alone, even when they are compatible, they sometimes will produce the same output for different files. The 32-bit output of the sum and cksum commands is simply too small for reliability, much less security. The popular SSH v1 CRC-32 compensation attack is the same vulnerability.
You could use md5sum instead, but there are different versions of this command. Each version has slight differences in formatting of filenames, whitespace and hexadecimal case. These differences in format prevent diff from running cleanly. In addition, there are known security vulnerabilities in the MD5 hash algorithm used by md5sum. And, sometimes md5sum isn't even installed.
GnuPG avoids these problems, because it produces the same output regardless of operating system or processor architecture. GnuPG also supports newer and more secure algorithms:
$ gpg --print-md sha1 filename filename: E83A 42B9 BC84 31A6 6450 99BE 50B6 341A 35D3 DCEB
It also will take multiple files:
$ gpg --print-md sha1 *.txt test.txt: E0D6 3F44 4253 CED5 9205 4047 4AA6 4E0F FD0F 130D test2.txt: 32AC 34F9 B7AF 1972 C015 E5EE 456E 89BD CC3C 7246
If you still need MD5, that's available too:
$ gpg --print-md md5 filename filename: 26 E9 85 5F 8A D6 A5 90 6F EA 12 12 83 C7 29 C4
The more recent GnuPG versions also support much more secure hash algorithms, such as SHA-512:
$ gpg --print-md sha512 filename filename: FC37410D 9336DD60 22AEB6A2 A42E82F1 2EA3470D 4982E958 B35C14A0 CF381CD2 3C4CBA35 BE5F11CB 05505ED2 DBF1C7A0 397EFF75 007FAEBB 30B43B30 6514990D
By the way, you can validate these --print-md examples by creating a file called filename containing the single line: The Linux Journal.
Your hash values should have exactly the same hexadecimal value as those in this article if the contents of the file is the same.
- You have to be careful there
7 weeks 4 days ago
- Wonder when LJ is going to
7 weeks 4 days ago
- Puerto Rico Free Software
7 weeks 5 days ago
7 weeks 6 days ago
- I hate voice commands
8 weeks 9 hours ago
- usabilty --- AGAIN with this nonsense
8 weeks 11 hours ago
- Don't make excuses
8 weeks 14 hours ago
- Sorry to let you know, but
8 weeks 15 hours ago
- Ridiculous statement. Not a
8 weeks 1 day ago
8 weeks 1 day ago