smartcard: generate under --card-edit with off-card backup and bkuptocard/checkbkupkey under --key-edit
NIIBE Yutaka
gniibe at fsij.org
Thu Dec 24 04:31:36 CET 2015
Hello,
I'm working the issue 2169: https://bugs.gnupg.org/gnupg/issue2169
Since I only do generating keys on card for testing purpose, I have
things to confirm for this use case.
# For myself, my practice is generating keys on host and doing
# keytocard.
While the support of checkbkupkey was removed, the two regressions
in 2.1 were fixed:
* generating keys on card with off-card backup
* bkuptocard
The checkbkupkey will be implemented again, if it's useful. AIUC,
this command is for a user who wants to make sure if the backup file
can be used correctly with a passphrase remembered. It would be just
simple to have another subcommand to recover a private subkey on host
from the backup (and a user will do "keytocard", if needed).
It seems that the scenario of bkuptocard is something like:
(1) The smartcard was lost/broken.
(2) But a user wants to read encrypted messages.
(3) There is the public key (primary, subkeys) on host as well as
the backup file for private key.
(4) With new smartcard, a user recovers encryption key using the
backup file for private key.
Is this correct?
Backup file is created on GnuPG's homedir. So, I think that the commit
which assumes homedir for backup file makes sense:
ee433d2b00c93b5a4e4ed54b9fb5806361df1b71
If this is useful, I'd like to backport this to 2.0.
Currently, the private key stub is precondition for the subcommand
bkuptocard:
{ "bkuptocard", cmdBKUPTOCARD, KEYEDIT_NEED_SK | KEYEDIT_ONLY_SK,
N_("move a backup key to a smartcard")},
But I think that it is OK not to have the private key stub files on
host.
Shall I remove KEYEDIT_NEED_SK flag from "cmds"?
--
More information about the Gnupg-devel
mailing list