A postmortem on Efail

Mark Rousell markr at signal100.com
Tue May 22 02:28:24 CEST 2018

On 21/05/2018 09:54, Damien Goutte-Gattat via Gnupg-users wrote:
> On 05/21/2018 04:07 AM, Mark Rousell wrote:
>> I think you mean that support for 2.0.y has been dropped, surely?
> No, I do mean that support for all PGP 2-related stuff has been dropped
> from the current stable branch. Modern GnuPG (≥ 2.1) can neither read
> nor write anything that has been generated by PGP 2.x. Compatibility
> starts with PGP 5, which dates back to 1997.

Ah, gotcha. I was being careless over terminology.

>> When I wrote "2.x.y" above I meant that users should be able 
>> to continue decrypting legacy-encrypted data (albeit with a change of
>> commands/options compared to the present) with whatever the
>> currently-supported version of 2.something is at any point in the
>> future.
> Well, that's already not the case. If you have pre-1997 data, you need
> to use GnuPG 1.4, which again *is* still supported precisely for this
> use case. (You could also, in theory, use GnuPG 2.0.x, but *that* branch
> is explicitly no longer supported.)

Thanks. This satisfies my preferences, that legacy-encrypted data can be
decrypted with maintained code.

Mark Rousell

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/attachments/20180522/9c7154b9/attachment.html>

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list