Re: [openpgp] Stateless OpenPGP command line interface proposal

Wyllys Ingersoll <> Mon, 02 December 2019 22:27 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAF6A12008B for <>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 14:27:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fzVdU_1EfAnF for <>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 14:27:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::731]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FDF4120018 for <>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 14:27:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id i18so1319244qkl.11 for <>; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 14:27:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=sh59Q05HdgxnLy9+GGj5+b0oVP5ccP0QKQmmDZ4xxec=; b=Ji7d7RvuE2kXVIQXw+HiP4ZqARFjmR0HSW4S8qvPe0TfWzCxHOUucS2qqfCUFkKFiD /vnxfCpenjreR7EacoU/5wUCFnGQVw6uybRHb4UNXPkrfMj2VoAshQNvAiZdw/Uvu6a7 rQ3JQrAe+MBZIj73PcutE3ztVN0NeQxjI6DIQsuq1a77zwAAxXwjZUHnwbJsXOT6RYlx 4tk9vo2e84HC9OwWB4uh98LFd1uF77rcbX97hwUaO1f0vmpwMoHswMgh+9uP19ink8Q9 sI1LdhhlqgVPqsUI4pmhB2Z0CYL+DtI8kvMqKk/KZG2rFOTYkUhNfeQ1cyU1jHHtFYtZ w4yQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=sh59Q05HdgxnLy9+GGj5+b0oVP5ccP0QKQmmDZ4xxec=; b=qkroL1MBX1UUFrZP0DnxdEIStmKRhK5Ga0kRHL6gdOnWIU3KB/TulrNIP8gO24KeM5 dCL3B1KO6OTYmKHaCeRGsw4xj6AM4iGtaZqP0NSV9bYMHnRC6VebDAqJrzvpLceQ72GN lumUblAaTriaYGDfvWb/3OAULCd6D1WPlnWazhX+K5ojFnaOnzfeWwDM57L+mS74/DyL kzAvdaESaJKsb9mLRH+fr+O/4OeKkt/QSAI5BF40VQOrLvxE5yiAlvxnxUtklI2IXjn5 CfhBWKhT43AvMYt/7FnlwdejZpPDO14LKANrJieeaSECIK/2ZomR+QdD7pnalAwd0SN4 olxw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXW+S/K9soiXeEge5esdU601zncoBi+LvkrOEn4vxZzrUk+nMhV d+zHGJaCm2cZTDju8EE4ZwhFnS2P8U6bxFI+2GelOO3G
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzwaDTLC0O8eyDquFuJG2P67fomW6rxHtCPgi55QL515CPeuwltTlUQn6xKj9vKEWlsyqkM1hLYN7F8SvVoS0c=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:4fd0:: with SMTP id d199mr1610126qkb.103.1575325640985; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 14:27:20 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <20191028204032.bubbzueti2ebpobm@LykOS.localdomain> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Wyllys Ingersoll <>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 17:27:09 -0500
Message-ID: <>
To: " OpenPGP" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003c92420598c0158f"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Stateless OpenPGP command line interface proposal
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2019 22:27:25 -0000

Does anyone have a good estimate of how many command-line oriented OpenPGP
applications are actually in use beyond GnuPG? Im really just curious, I
was under the impression that GnuPG is sort of the de-facto standard
implementation for the majority of OpenPGP users on a computer with a
keyboard.  I know there are implementations for a variety of other
languages, but I wonder if they have significantly motivated development
teams that would take this on and implement it in practice. Has the GnuPG
team indicated an interest in writing an entirely new CLI ?  For mobile
applications and other OpenPGP implementations that do not even have a CLI
this is obviously not going to be of interest, but I understand that that's
not the target audience for this sort of document anyway.

Im not trying to throw cold water on the efforts to standardize a more
friendly interface on an increasingly complicated protocol, I just wonder
how far it will go beyond becoming an interesting specification.

-Wyllys Ingersoll

On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 4:58 PM iang <> wrote:

> On 28/10/2019 22:40, Santiago Torres-Arias wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 04:20:39PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> >> Hi OpenPGP folks--
> >>
> >> The recently-announced OpenPGP test suite [0] inspired me to try
> >> drafting a spec for a purely-functional, stateless OpenPGP command line
> >> interface.  The idea is that different implementers could provide the
> >> same interface, focusing specifically on the object security aspect of
> >> OpenPGP (leaving aside identity management).
> >> ...
> > I think this is a *phenomenal* idea. I wonder if this could mature in a
> > well-defined API that e.g., gpgme could adopt?
> Concur!
> iang
> _______________________________________________
> openpgp mailing list