[PATCH] doc: elaborate on --default-cache-ttl and --max-cache-ttl

Martin Ichilevici de Oliveira iomartin at iomartin.net
Thu Oct 30 15:48:30 CET 2014

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 03:22:31PM +0100, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:32, iomartin at iomartin.net said:
> > I'm sorry (and I don't mean to be annoying), but I still don't
> > understand why gnupg doesn't support infinite ttl? Is it by design or
> What is the use case case for this?  I can't see one except to work
> around a bogus security policy.  If you do not have a need for a
> passphrase you should not use a passphrase for the protection of your
> secret key.

I see what you mean.

Personally, I use gnupg mostly for signing email, and once in a while
for encrypting it. I don't want to enter my passphrase every so often,
but at the same time I didn't like the idea of using no passhprase at

Given that I usually reboot my computer around once a week, I found it
to be a good compromise (in my case), to enter it once and then not
worrying. I achieved that with a high ttl, but this just feels clumsy to
me. Maybe that's what you'll call a bogus security policy - and you
might be right - but it just seems cleaner to use -1 instead.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20141030/c7fefe93/attachment.sig>

More information about the Gnupg-devel mailing list