Confirmation for cached passphrases useful?

Jameson Rollins jrollins at
Sat Oct 16 01:26:14 CEST 2010

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 01:05:11 +0200, Hauke Laging <mailinglisten at> wrote:
> I just don't like the idea that access to the agent is "not noticed by
> design".

I strongly agree with this point.  Let's think about it another way:
what if the user is themselves doing something that is unintentionally
accessing the key?  They might prefer to know about it rather than have
it accessed without their knowledge.  I would say that's good enough
reason to have confirmation right there.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20101015/5cc4b07a/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list