On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 01:31:38PM -0500, Anthony Papillion wrote: > I understand what S/MIME is and that it's probably the easiest crypto > solution for most email users. But why would someone comfortable with > GnuPG use it? Does it offer any advantages over traditional PGP keys? If > I understand correctly, it's a certificate that much like a SSL > certificate. If that's the case, doesn't it suffer from the same > weaknesses that SSL certs currently suffer from (like double issuance, etc)? > > Why would I want to use S/MIME?
Are you comparing S/MIME to PGP/MIME and PGP/Inline? I assume so, with your
question regarding GnuPG. As such, S/MIME provides some advantages over
PGP/MIME, IMO:
* S/MIME ships the entire public key as part of the email.
* S/MIME certificates are usually created and managed by the organization.
* There as wide-spread MUA support for S/MIME (EG: Outlook).
PGP/MIME and PGP/Inline generally mean getting the public key separately.
Because PGP and OpenPGP are decentralized, trust is manual (versus CAs with SSL
certificates in S/MIME). There is not widespread support for OpenPGP public
keys in MUAs, such as Outlook and most web-based MUAs. OpenPGP keys must be
managed independently, and this has shown to be more work than most people are
willing to put in.
--
. o . o . o . . o o . . . o .
. . o . o o o . o . o o . . o
o o o . o . . o o o o . o o o
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
