From the link I posted about: >you can’t simply use a static key pair with age to achieve authenticated encryption as age’s key-wrapping algorithm is completel

From the link I posted about: >you can’t simply use a static key pair with age to achieve authenticated encryption as age’s key-wrapping algorithm is completely insecure when used in this way >an attacker cannot tamper with the encrypted ciphertext, but they can completely replace it with one of their own choosing >it is completely insecure to pipe the output of age into another tool without independently establishing the authenticity of the file Can you go into depth about why it's "grossly inaccurate"? So far you haven't actually explained why it's not correct, and these quotes seem to directly support everything that I have said. Is there an issue with the authors analysis perhaps? Has age since then resolved any of this? I am curious what makes you disagree here. I suspect that what you are arguing is mostly semantics about age using authenticated encryption during the symmetric phase of the whole process, but since the symmetric key is not authenticated that defeats the purpose as far as I can tell.