best practices for creating keys
jameszee13 at gmail.com
Mon Nov 23 21:31:10 CET 2015
Thank you Robert and Peter.
It appears that information I had read previously was erroneous. I was
under the impression the capabilities (at least for the primary key)
were set in stone, hence my apprehension at avoiding those insatiable
knobs and gears I like to tinker with. ;)
This thread has been tremendously insightful. My thanks to all who
responded and shared their perspectives.
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Robert J. Hansen <rjh at sixdemonbag.org> wrote:
>> The same can be said for almost any complex system, software or not.
> Absolutely. Please don't misinterpret what I said as trying to dissuade
> you from curiosity. I'm just urging you to not let your curiosity lead
> you into making poor decisions from the get-go.
> The following anecdote is meandering, but if you'll bear with me for two
> paragraphs it'll make sense:
> I live in the United States, in a state which allows private citizens,
> under incredibly close regulation, to own military firearms. When I
> visit the rifle range, sometimes I'll spend some time with a suppressed
> German-made MP5SD3 submachinegun. (It's not mine: a friend owns one and
> we sometimes hit the range together.) It's a nice piece of kit; I like
> it. And quite often, other people who are at the range want to talk
> shop about it. We get into discussions about roller-locked firearms
> like the Cz52 and MG42 versus roller-delayed firearms like the MP5, how
> annoying it is when people get the terminology wrong, whether it's a
> good thing or a bad thing the MP5 uses a fluted chamber, how anyone who
> thinks it's okay to fire subsonic 9mm from the MP5 needs their head
> examined, and so on and so on. And it's fun, as far as it goes, and
> it's often educational for the people who've never seen an MP5 before
> and are fascinated to learn more about its inner workings.
> It's great -- up until they think they know enough to use an MP5 on the
> range, despite the fact they've never fired a weapon before. At that
> point we have to explain to them that look, yes, they know a lot more
> about the MP5 than most people do, but really, they need to start off
> with something small, like a nice .22 Ruger Mk II, develop the basic
> skills, learn trigger discipline and proper usage of safeties, learn how
> the range operates and what the various calls by the Range Safety
> Officers mean, etcetera. There's a huge amount to learn: they don't
> need to make things worse by leaping straight over this stuff straight
> to firing fully-automatic military hardware. That's just imprudent, and
> we'd be awful human beings if we permitted them to do that.
> That's what we're talking about here. The knobs and dials on GnuPG are
> great fun to learn about: you're in good company! But there's a big
> reason why we're urging you to not do what you want to do, and that's
> because you're not yet competent to do what you want to do. We'd rather
> see you start off with small steps, and from there move on to the big
> ones, than have you start off big.
> Admittedly, it's highly unlikely that screwing up with GnuPG will lead
> to a magazine of 9mm being sprayed around the room. But it's the
> principle of the thing. :)
> So: for now, please stick with the defaults.
>> It seems to me that, perhaps, making these sorts of decisions up front
>> is of some value.
> Not really. It's probably not worth worrying about.
>> If you create a primary key, upload it to a public
>> keyserver and later decide: "hrm, my public key should really only
>> certify, not sign," it's a bit too late.
> One of the important skills to learn early on is about how to migrate a
> certificate. You're going to make mistakes. You'll forget passphrases,
> you'll compromise your keys, you'll realize you made a hash of it and
> need to start over again. How do you recover from this? How do you
> communicate a change-of-certificate with your correspondents? Etc.
> The only reason to think "it's a bit too late" is if
> a) you're not allowed to change your certificate -- you
> *must* keep the same one for the next X years
> b) you don't know how to migrate to a new certificate
> There are almost certainly people and groups for whom (a) applies. If
> you're one of them, please let me know. But if (b) applies, then I
> suggest learning the skill, because it's important. :)
>> It's also worth noting that the suggestion to remove the primary key
>> from your laptop isn't thrown up on a few random blogs; instead it is
>> something that other projects encourage.
> That wiki page is guidance *for Debian*. Debian has some very specific
> operating restrictions which are unlikely to apply to you. The
> guidelines Debian put together apply to them, in their environment,
> facing their threat model, which they defend with their particular set
> of resources.
> It is not guidance for you, unless you're part of Debian.
> By all means, study it! It's a well-written policy. Learn what goes
> into their policy and why they make the decisions they do. But don't
> think that what they recommend will automatically apply to you. Some of
> it will be applicable; a lot of it won't be.
>> If one's primary key is his or her identity, I'd like to be certain
>> that I correctly create the key(s).
> Yes. And, as several people here have told you, you correctly create it
> by running "gpg --gen-key" and accepting the defaults.
> Gnupg-users mailing list
> Gnupg-users at gnupg.org
More information about the Gnupg-users