OpenPGPv5 wish list
jeanjacquesbrucker at gmail.com
Mon Apr 29 12:17:03 CEST 2013
Le Mon, 29 Apr 2013 01:17:04 -0400,
"Robert J. Hansen" <rjh at sixdemonbag.org> a écrit :
> On 4/28/2013 10:37 PM, Hauke Laging wrote:
> > Other things we IMHO really need notation standards for:
> This really isn't the place for it, guys. GnuPG-devel is for
> discussion of how to make GnuPG track the standard better; the
> OpenPGP list is for discussion of how to make the standard itself
Yep, so I switched the thread to the other mailing list.
> > Things I want in the protocol:
> I'll make my own wish list simple:
> I don't want *anything* new included in the standard unless there
> exists at least one user who says, "the absence of this feature is a
> showstopper for me and is blocking my adoption of GnuPG." This user
> needs to be able to show a real-world use case and be willing to
> volunteer to run trials in a real-world environment.
> No real-world user? No feature.
So I answered because I really "need" such feature in OpenPGP for
2) What is the key used for?
And I see at least 4 purposes :
- To authenticate itself through TLS [RFC6091]
- Maybe To sign other certificates (subkeys on smartcard issues)
- To authenticate through HTTP (gpgauth or
- To sign an OpenUDC transaction.
I work especially on the 2 last purposes. And having the possibility
for the owner to set descriptions, or more flags on its (sub)keys inside
its OpenPGP certificate, would be a more elegant solution than some
workaround we have to manage.
> That's my own wish list, and I desperately hope it comes to pass. :)
We have to better organize A wish list, or it will be a mess to
identify their elements. :-)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Gnupg-devel