On 10/10/2013 03:55 PM, adrelanos wrote:
Thank you for doing this work!
The world needs someone facing the truth, explaining why gpg isn't the
solution, advocating positive change. It's a communicative task, a very
difficult one. As long there is gpg, most geeks don't see need to create
better alternatives.
I'd say, gpg's development slowed down. They're qualified but standing
in their own way. They should break compatibility with commercial PGP
(not because thats good, just because it's easier to implement better
solutions), also break compatibility with RFCs, implement better
solutions and standardize later. The current "first standardize, then
maybe implement, and don't implement if it's not standardized" approach
is much too slow, can't keep up with real developments in real word.
(Still don't even have mail subject encryption.) If Bitmessage succeeds
(I haven't learned much about it yet),
Bitmessage doesn't have forward secrecy, and AFAICT there's no
way to easily add it later on.
Best,
Jonathan
--
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of
list guidelines will get you moderated:
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change
to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
