On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 19:55:58 +0100, Sven Radde wrote: > Robert J. Hansen schrieb: >>> If so, why was (sign and encrypt) not offered as an option? >> >> Having one key that can be used for both signing and encryption >> operations is thought by some to be bad crypto policy. The problems >> with it appear to be mostly theoretical, though. > > If you use "gpg --expert --gen-key", it will offer the selection: > (7) RSA (set your own capabilities) > This lets you choose a key which can be used for signing and encrypting. > > Anyway, if there's a question "Why a subkey?", its partner-question > would be: "Why not?" > > cu, Sven
Thanks four your "-expert" suggestion. While I would consider myself a "-novice" with regard to gpg, it is, perhaps, something I should try. Your "Why not?" question is another matter. If you are employed, I suggest you try it on your manager next time you are required to justify a costly idea. Mike. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
