3 ms·
Using GPG, I encrypt sensitive e-mail, such as e-mails that include credentials for another system. However, I do not encrypt all e-mail, even to recipients wh
by bhauer 13y ago
Using GPG, I encrypt sensitive e-mail, such as e-mails that include credentials for another system. However, I do not encrypt all e-mail, even to recipients who use GPG.
The bottom line is this: the user interface of GPG is awful--among the worst this side of Git. "Barely usable" is the briefest way I can describe it.
And it's not the key exchange that makes it so bad; exchanging keys is the easy part. My gripe is with the routine UI clunkiness of GPG. For example, it's not possible to paste into or use Keepass' "auto-type" feature to type my passphrase into the GPG dialog. So I have to manually type my sequence of 50 random letters, numbers, and symbols nearly every time I receive an encrypted e-mail. It's so bad that unless an encrypted e-mail is urgent, I'll defer it until I'm in the mood to look up and type my passphrase.
- zobzu 13y agoI could have typed this comment. I'm glad I'm not the only one to work that way and think that way. Note: it's possible to hack in a pinentry program that is compatible with "what you want" (pretty sure it's doable for keepass). Easier than emulating gpg-agent and/or more convenient than using a smartcard.
- jlgaddis 13y agoYou may consider a smart card or a different mail client/UI if/when you need to make use of encrypted mail. I use mutt as my mail client and I could easily paste in my passphrase if I wanted to.