Mailing List Archive

Invalid armor header decoding PGP 6.0.2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Sorry if this has already been mentioned.

I got a message from someone who uses PGP 6.0.2, and GPG apparantly
didn't like it:

harmless:~$ gpg -v -v < natf.log
gpg (GnuPG) 0.9.6; Copyright (C) 1999 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.

gpg: armor: BEGIN PGP MESSAGE
gpg: armor header: Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2
gpg: armor header: Comment: Finger:<snipped for privacy> for public keys
gpg: invalid armor header:
harmless:~$

The message looked like this (actual data changed):

- -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2
Comment: Finger:<snip> for public keys

aThadHfhaBERbafy3hasu64wasgfdg/5hdfah64hwshtHSffaRhr
...
EQwtsrqenW3MdTvQkcKI0idrQgwo0C8h3lm5E+Z/GmKH12LieEM=
=p6NI
- -----END PGP MESSAGE-----

I gutted the base64 stuff and pasted it into a GPG shell, and it
successfully decoded it.

Has this been mentioned before? Why would it do this?
Thanks.

Nate


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.9.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE3QNKm8WKagKsEr/ERAjAXAJ4uoNXWISGw3/o38XzpMDyiXPX4QQCgmbQ7
B9LkvtNZMukS8SnotXTqvpI=
=sZZo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: Invalid armor header decoding PGP 6.0.2 [ In reply to ]
Nathan Kennedy <blaaf@hempseed.com> writes:

> gpg: armor header: Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2
> gpg: armor header: Comment: Finger:<snipped for privacy> for public keys
> gpg: invalid armor header:

Can you please send me the message has a tar or gzipped - it may be a
problem with the line terminators. I don't need the actual data stuff
as long as you can reproduce the error with faked data.


--
Werner Koch at guug.de www.gnupg.org keyid 621CC013
Re: Invalid armor header decoding PGP 6.0.2 [ In reply to ]
>Can you please send me the message has a tar or gzipped - it may be a
>problem with the line terminators. I don't need the actual data stuff
>as long as you can reproduce the error with faked data.

Never mind this one. It got munged in transit. It was a problem
with the line terminators, and it became dossified.

Sorry,

Nate