Prefer a currently available signing subkey?

[Andrew Stubbs]

Yes, this affects me too - sorry for the "me too" email!

It has actually prevented me from registering my key on keybase.io (if
that's a "thing") --- I suppose I could go through the rigmarole of
building the Faraday cage, getting the offline key out and revoking the
offending signing keys, as if it wasn't fiddly and generally inconvenient
enough already... but I really would like to have different signing and
authentication keys on each smart card I use, even if the encryption key is
the same. And of course the latest key I created is actually my "weakest"
key (for an experiment with a Yubikey NEO). Sigh.

I wish it would make a decision more along the lines of "of the keys I have
available, I'll pick the newest or 'strongest'", rather than "I don't care
what keys I have available, I just want the newest". Sadly I don't think I
have even the skills to find where this decision is made in the code, let
alone change it. I really hope it gets some attention soon though! Thankyou
for bumping the priority.

Apart from that bugbear, love the software.

Andy

On 19 April 2017 at 16:46, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg at fifthhorseman.net>
wrote:

> On Tue 2017-04-18 15:41:08 +0000, Arthur Ulfeldt wrote:
> > I had exactly the same problem, and there is an open bug about this
> (wanna
> > fix it?) I forgot the number.
>
> The open report is https://dev.gnupg.org/T1983
>
> I've just moved this to priority "high" since it seems to continue to
> affect people.
>
>        --dkg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnupg-users mailing list
> Gnupg-users at gnupg.org
> http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20170419/40a8e064/attachment.html>