5 ms·

Age doesn't do signing.

ameliaquining 5y ago
Fortunately, minisign does. age doesn't replace everything PGP does, which is good, because PGP does too many things. It just replaces the use case of file encryption (which itself is arguably too general; it's perhaps best to think of age as a good fallback for encryption use cases that don't have a better domain-specific tool). See https://latacora.micro.blog/2019/07/16/the-pgp-problem.html https://latacora.micro.blog/2019/07/16/the-pgp-problem.html
- upofadown 5y ago
  This is the second link to "The PGP Problem" here. I will only post my critique of that anti-PGP rant once: * https://articles.59.ca/doku.php?id=pgpfan:tpp https://articles.59.ca/doku.php?id=pgpfan:tpp
  - tptacek 5y ago
    The thread on that post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27181576 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27181576 Obviously consider the source, but: I think that thread is better reading than the article.
tptacek 5y ago
Age doesn't do signing because PGP's signing mechanics have been one of the biggest fiascos in popular cryptography (to this day, mainstream PGP use via GnuPG doesn't produce authenticated ciphertext, due to confusion on the part of PGP's designers on the distinction between authentication and signatures). In day-to-day encrypted secure messaging, durable signatures are one of those things that sound great but are actually the opposite of what you want. The most widespread practical use of PGP's signature capabilities are for package systems, where the actual contents of the package aren't confidential to begin with; PGP is only being used to sign. But PGP signatures are clumsy and archaic, and there are better tools to get the same capability without PGP's baggage --- notably the "signify" scheme that OpenBSD came up with and that minisign implements.
- guenthert 5y ago
  > due to confusion on the part of PGP's designers on the distinction between authentication and signatures I'm not sure where you're heading when you think that the general populace would be any less confused about that.
  - tptacek 5y ago
    Can you reword this? I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you asking me to go into more detail on the difference between a signature and a message authentication tag?
  - CiPHPerCoder 5y ago
    Confusing the two is perilous. https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2016/03/21/attack-of-week-apple-imessage/ https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2016/03/21/attack-o...

Fortunately, minisign does. age doesn't replace everything PGP does, which is good, because PGP does too many things. It just replaces the use case of file encryption (which itself is arguably too general; it's perhaps best to think of age as a good fallback for encryption use cases that don't have a better domain-specific tool). See https://latacora.micro.blog/2019/07/16/the-pgp-problem.html https://latacora.micro.blog/2019/07/16/the-pgp-problem.html

upofadown 5y ago
This is the second link to "The PGP Problem" here. I will only post my critique of that anti-PGP rant once: * https://articles.59.ca/doku.php?id=pgpfan:tpp https://articles.59.ca/doku.php?id=pgpfan:tpp
- tptacek 5y ago
  The thread on that post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27181576 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27181576 Obviously consider the source, but: I think that thread is better reading than the article.

tptacek 5y ago

Age doesn't do signing because PGP's signing mechanics have been one of the biggest fiascos in popular cryptography (to this day, mainstream PGP use via GnuPG doesn't produce authenticated ciphertext, due to confusion on the part of PGP's designers on the distinction between authentication and signatures). In day-to-day encrypted secure messaging, durable signatures are one of those things that sound great but are actually the opposite of what you want. The most widespread practical use of PGP's signature capabilities are for package systems, where the actual contents of the package aren't confidential to begin with; PGP is only being used to sign. But PGP signatures are clumsy and archaic, and there are better tools to get the same capability without PGP's baggage --- notably the "signify" scheme that OpenBSD came up with and that minisign implements.

guenthert 5y ago
> due to confusion on the part of PGP's designers on the distinction between authentication and signatures I'm not sure where you're heading when you think that the general populace would be any less confused about that.
- tptacek 5y ago
  Can you reword this? I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you asking me to go into more detail on the difference between a signature and a message authentication tag?
- CiPHPerCoder 5y ago
  Confusing the two is perilous. https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2016/03/21/attack-of-week-apple-imessage/ https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2016/03/21/attack-o...