Work remaining for a 2.1 release?
wk at gnupg.org
Thu Feb 14 09:34:19 CET 2013
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 06:52, kylebutt at gmail.com said:
> Is there an objection to porting the common algorithms for the agent's storage?
Yes. The protection of private keys in OpenPGP is pretty complex,
carries a lot of historic baggage, and uses too much bit-fiddling.
Further, gpg-agent is designed to be protocol neutral thus does not need
to know about OpenPGP details.
Just for the sake of a one-time requirement for the passphrase it does
not make sense to make the current gpg-agent private key protection more
complex. I also bet that more than 99% of all users have only one key
and thus one passphrase (they should know very well).
Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
More information about the Gnupg-devel