3 ms·
The problem with keybase is that it has grown from a simple command-line tool (which I could perhaps trust) to a monster with a GUI, menu-bar icon, resident dae
by jwr 8y ago
The problem with keybase is that it has grown from a simple command-line tool (which I could perhaps trust) to a monster with a GUI, menu-bar icon, resident daemon, which does lots of things, and until recently failed to even properly start for me. The running process daemon is required even to use the CLI.
I'm glad you are making a PGP replacement, but I'm worried that this will head in the same direction. I want simpler, auditable and understandable systems for crypto, not complex beasts with hidden interactions.
- dbrgn 8y agoI fully share that opinion. I loved Keybase for its simplicity: It was a way to verify keys based on social media accounts and thus a more practical alternative to the web of trust. The client was optional, I could track someone by using bash and curl, and I kind of managed to understand how it works. Nowadays unfortunately it's a complex system of key management, account authentication, chat, file encryption, and more. I have no way to fully understand that system. Simplicity is an under-appreciated feature.
- pornel 8y agoOh yes! Keybase went full-Skype. I loved the concept of verifiable identity and that I could use it even with "plain" gpg commands without having to trust their client. Unsurprisingly, there was no way to monetize this, so they've had to pivot to being SlackDropboxIDontKnowWhat.app
- Boulth 8y agoToo bad as verifiable identities can already be implemented in pure OpenPGP, see Linked Identities (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vb-openpgp-linked-ids-01 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vb-openpgp-linked-ids-01) as implemented in e.g. OpenKeychain.