IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] Offline key flag

Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> Tue, 05 March 2013 16:57 UTC

Return-Path: <wk@gnupg.org>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAF2211E80F0 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 08:57:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -11.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YGLEwXc1W8ps for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 08:57:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from kerckhoffs.g10code.com (kerckhoffs.g10code.com [217.69.77.222]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98E7C11E80E4 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 08:57:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uucp by kerckhoffs.g10code.com with local-rmail (Exim 4.72 #1 (Debian)) id 1UCvBV-00089R-1j for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:57:49 +0100
Received: from wk by vigenere.g10code.de with local (Exim 4.77 #3 (Debian)) id 1UCv7f-0001PR-9o; Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:53:51 +0100
From: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
To: David Shaw <dshaw@jabberwocky.com>
References: <5135BDE6.1070200@fifthhorseman.net> <6F1173CD-290C-4A38-BD80-152C5E553D1F@jabberwocky.com> <87obexlu3e.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <D491B5DB-5F6A-4C1C-9474-29EF5571D893@jabberwocky.com>
Organisation: g10 Code GmbH
X-message-flag: Mails containing HTML will not be read! Please send only plain text.
OpenPGP: id=1E42B367; url=finger:wk@g10code.com
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:53:51 +0100
In-Reply-To: <D491B5DB-5F6A-4C1C-9474-29EF5571D893@jabberwocky.com> (David Shaw's message of "Tue, 5 Mar 2013 11:30:54 -0500")
Message-ID: <87k3pllrds.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: IETF OpenPGP <openpgp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Offline key flag
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/openpgp>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:57:53 -0000

On Tue,  5 Mar 2013 17:30, dshaw@jabberwocky.com said:

> Can you give an example why would someone want to publish that their private key is offline?  I'm not sure I see a use for that.

I have two encryption keys but only one marked as offline.  If someone
wants to send a quick message he would encrypt to the non-offline key.
If he has to tell me something really secret, he would select the
offline key, assuming that I will move the message to a non-networked
box where the offline key is stored.

I am not sure whether this is really useful for most users, but split
and group keys are also somewhat esoteric and not even defined in
OpenPGP.


Salam-Shalom,

   Werner

-- 
Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email