rsa-e / rsa-s distinction in --version output
Fri Oct 18 01:19:02 2002
Doing a gpg --version gives:
gpg (GnuPG) 1.2.0
Pubkey: RSA, RSA-E, RSA-S, ELG-E, DSA, ELG
Cipher: IDEA, 3DES, CAST5, BLOWFISH, AES, AES192, AES256, TWOFISH
Hash: MD5, SHA1, RIPEMD160
Compress: Uncompressed, ZIP, ZLIB
It's strange that RSA, RSA-E, and RSA-S are all listed. I can see
just listing RSA for simplicity, or just listing RSA-E/S, but all
three? Why? It's confusing. If RSA-E is for encryption, and RSA-S
is for signatures, what is meant by RSA?
It seems like there shouldn't be any distinction at all. If I
generate an RSA key, technically that key can be used for encrypting
or signing.. In fact, signing is encrypting; correct? Signing is just
taking a hash and encrypting it like it's a message, only the in this
case the private key is used. The algorithm doesn't care whether it's
a -E or -S key.
Equally confusing, ELG and ELG-E are listed. No ELG-S? With the
expert setting, I can create an ELG key that can be used to sign.