Standards and PGP wraper

Fabio Coatti cova at
Sun Nov 8 07:59:36 CET 1998

On Fri, Nov 06, 1998 at 06:17:43PM +0100, Michael Roth wrote:

> IMHO the answer of the question "prefer a type 16 subkey for encryption
> because pgp cannot handle type 20?" from the TODO file in gnupg should be:
> "type 20 should be default, but provide a way for creating pgp compatible
> packets and keys because pgp is really widly spread." 
> I think this way is the right one.

I agree with you. I like the way gpg handles IDEA and RSA. Not the default,
but available. It's important that a new package can replace the old one,
without losing capabilities. In this way, given that I can use RSA and IDEA,
I can delete pgp from my HD. Now I can deal with the rest of the world and
in the same time use and spread gpg only signed messages.

> But I would like to know your opinions about the most important
> features/functions of a wrapper. For example I think we don't need
> key management in the wrapper!?

I don't know for the wrapper, but a nice key management for gpg is needed.
Non only with graphic interface, but also a text mode one (ncurses based?). 
Built in key editor is a little bit confusing...

Fabio Coatti               
Ferrara Linux Users Group
GnuPG fp:6AB9 277E 9AA7 9D20 E82C  9EE7 2D17 E351 3DCB 0CDC
Old SysOps never die... they simply forget their password.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/19981108/df866499/attachment.bin

More information about the Gnupg-devel mailing list