gnunet-developers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNUnet-developers] debian packages of 0.5.4


From: Christian Grothoff
Subject: Re: [GNUnet-developers] debian packages of 0.5.4
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 18:33:58 -0500
User-agent: KMail/1.4.3

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 25 June 2003 07:50 am, Uli Luckas wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 27. Mai 2003 22:18 schrieb Glenn McGrath:
> > I have some debian packages available of 0.5.4 at
> > http://people.debian.org/~bug1/gnunet/
>
> I just installed the debian packages and can't get them to work properly.
>
> 1) "gnunet-search GPL" does not find anything

Have you tried "test" or "gpl"?

> 2) "gnunet-insert-multi foo-bar.mp3" complains:
>       Loading library libextractor_pdf failed (/usr/lib/libextractor_pdf.so:
>       undefined symbol: __gxx_personality_v0)!

That will be fixed in the next version of libextractor (I hope). Should not 
affect anything but pdf file insertions.

>       Jun 25 14:48:21 FAILURE: symcipher.c:encryptBlock: gcry_cipher_setkey
> failed (weak encryption key)!
>       Jun 25 14:48:21 FATAL: encryption failed!?Jun 25 14:48:21 __BREAK__ at
>       logging.c:226
>
> Does any one know where the "weak encryption key" message comes form? And,
> of course, what to do about it?

It means, that the key chosen for the encryption was classified by libgcrypt 
as "weak" (that is, easier to break than it should be). Typically, there is 
some bit-pattern in the key (e.g. all-zeros would probably do it) that makes 
the key not work properly.  Now, for insertion, you don't get to pick or 
generate keys, they are derived from the hash-code. Now, it seems that for 
your particular file, either the contents or the keywords hash to a key that 
happens to be classified as "weak". It is definitely something that should 
hardly ever occur. Could you try building GNUnet with OpenSSL or the new, 
build-in crypto code and see if the error happens with those crypto systems, 
too? 

Either way, it might be good if you could file a report on Mantis (with the 
file in question attached) such that I can try to reproduce this.

Christian

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE++jFm9tNtMeXQLkIRAlO0AJ48Qvn00xmhhSgW1nKX9Vd0QPetGQCeOxCo
08lhht4Br7dS5EHWWUO4kJQ=
=z4Y8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]