3 ms·
Sorry but no. This makes your private key compromised by default... The most important rule of public key encryption is... Never (really!) let anybody else han
by svennek 12y ago
Sorry but no. This makes your private key compromised by default...
The most important rule of public key encryption is... Never (really!) let anybody else handle your private key...
And why should I trust some random website for not storing an extra copy? The keys are definitely not "... as secure as if you have generated them by yourself. ". Because, if I generate them, I know that my box is the only one that had ever touched it...
- yuvadam 12y agoThanks for the feedback, I totally agree, and see my comment below. I'll definitely make this more noticeable on the page.
- olalonde 12y agoIt is possible to safely outsource the creation of vanity bitcoin addresses (http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3853/can-one-safely-buy-vanity-addresses-from-a-third-party-without-risking-ones-coi http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3853/can-one-safe...). That being said, I'm not sure if the techniques used are applicable to GPG.
- yuvadam 12y agoOnce GnuPG supports ECDSA (hopefully, in the near future, there's a branch with some of the code already implemented) I'll be happy to switch the service to this secure method!
- atmosx 12y agoI thought that if the user changes the passphrase[1] it could be done... But since the keys (private/public) remain the same, doesn't make any sense in this scenario. As I understand this (didn't try it) you could have 2 computers, same private/public keys different passphrase on each computer. [1] http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/37510/when-changing-a-pgp-passphrase-does-it-only-affect-the-private-key http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/37510/when-chang...