UI terminology for calculated validities

Peter Lebbing peter at digitalbrains.com
Wed Apr 23 11:51:02 CEST 2014

On 23/04/14 00:49, Hauke Laging wrote:
> We do agree that crypto is by its nature difficult (I don't mean the math I 
> mean the organizational envorinment) and that a serious part of this 
> difficulty is more or less hidden by current tools (in order not to scare
> the users away), don't we?

We agree on the first point, crypto is by its nature difficult. Which is
/precisely/ why you shouldn't make it more difficult than necessary.

On the latter point: I think the user interfaces can be made better, but I
disagree with your description of that. We do agree to disagree, don't we?

> Thus we should head for most users having several keys.

That's how you want to improve the user interface for, I quote, the
"non-expert(!) user"? In that case we disagree about the right way to do this on
such a fundamental level that I don't think we're going to come to common ground.

Also, I think this discussion would benefit from a narrower scope. Let's focus
on terminology and user interface elements with the current mechanics, and leave
things like "the lack of transparency of the security level" to other threads.



I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail.
You can send me encrypted mail if you want some privacy.
My key is available at <http://digitalbrains.com/2012/openpgp-key-peter>

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list