Gpgtools GPGServices → 1.8

Comments and changes to this ticket

• 

  steve July 13th, 2011 @ 11:12 AM

  Imo a great idea. Do I understand correctly that the user be able to encrypt files with people not using GPG but rather use a shared password for encryption? I read that the symmetric key needs to be transferred between the two parties. So what safe transfer via the web would there be except key-pair encryption? Then it makes no sense to support it. Because it would require key-pair encryption to transfere the key.

  Just curious, what would the use-case for this look like?

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  Alex (via GPGTools) July 13th, 2011 @ 11:33 AM

  Symmetric encryption is useful if you don't plan to deliver or distribute the files to other people (e.g. you may simply want to protect sensitive files on your own hard drive) or you just want to send s.o. an encrypted file with a known password w/o the hassle to validate the other ones key first.

  • http://advosys.ca/viewpoints/2006/07/pgp-symmetric-encryption/
  • http://savvyadmin.com/symmetric-key-encryption-with-gnupg/
  • http://www.gnupg.org/gph/en/manual.html#AEN185

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  Dean Smith August 17th, 2011 @ 05:06 PM

  I'd very much like to see this as well.

  We often need to distribute documents to people who may well not have public/private keys.

  Having to drop to the command line to do symmetric encryption is a bit of a pain compared to the right click services method.

• 

  steve August 17th, 2011 @ 06:16 PM

  Do I remember correctly, that this has already been discussed a while ago?

  I personally can't see a lot of benefit in this. If you want to share sensitive data, you might want to do it the save way and that is not symmetric encryption.

  How will those people you want to share documents know about the shared secret? Via telephone? Mail? Then you don't need to encrypt at all.

  I might be missing sth but maybe it's a better idea to convince those guys to create a key pair.

  Moritz, what do you think? What's the benefit in implementing this?

  Possibility would be to integrate it and present the user a warning.

  Sent from my mobile - excuse my brevity

  Am 17.08.2011 um 17:05 schrieb "Lighthouse" <no-reply@lighthouseapp.com>:

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  Alex (via GPGTools) August 17th, 2011 @ 11:57 PM

  I disagree. It's save and useful (cf. my comments above).

• 

  steve August 18th, 2011 @ 12:14 AM

  Sry! Didn't read the whole ticket only the update and wasn't sure. Now I remember. sorry bothering and adding useless content. Alex, feel free to delete the last three comments.

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  ronin-140089 (at lighthouseapp) August 18th, 2011 @ 01:05 AM

  I personally don't want to add another menu item to the service menu. We already have more than I'm happy with.
  Symmetrical encryption could be added as a button or as a tab in the recipient window. Take a look at the attached file.

  I won't get to this today, maybe tomorrow.

  • bildschirmfoto-2011-08-18-um-01.png 64.1 KB

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  ronin-140089 (at lighthouseapp) August 18th, 2011 @ 01:13 AM

  • State changed from “open” to “started”

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  Alex (via GPGTools) August 18th, 2011 @ 08:31 AM

  Looks good!

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  ronin-140089 (at lighthouseapp) August 23rd, 2011 @ 04:11 PM

  It's better to implement it using a new entry in the Services menu, as the current backend uses pinentry as the input method for the password. Should be ready today.

• 

  steve January 29th, 2012 @ 04:44 PM

  • Assigned user changed from “ronin-140089 (at lighthouseapp)” to “Jeff burdges”
  • Importance changed from “” to “”
• 

  steve April 30th, 2012 @ 05:46 PM

  • Milestone changed from “1.7” to “1.8”
  • Importance changed from “” to “”

  [bulk edit]

• 

  steve April 30th, 2012 @ 05:48 PM

  • Assigned user cleared.

  [bulk edit]

• 

  Support May 22nd, 2012 @ 01:09 PM

  Assigned to Tender discussion #1285.

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  Craig Billingsley May 22nd, 2012 @ 04:20 PM

  Great to see that this is being worked on. Symmetric encryption was a great option on earlier versions. I totally agree that not everyone will set up public keys. If you do not communicate the symmetric passphrase via email, but rather by phone, etc., then this option is as secure as the passphrase that one uses. Thanks for working on this.

• 

  steve August 13th, 2012 @ 03:28 PM

  • State changed from “started” to “fixed”
  • Assigned user set to “Mento”
  • Importance changed from “” to “”

  And it is done!

  :)

  Thanks Mento. Happy, that we can now offer this often requested feature. Head to the nightly if you want to try: https://nightly.gpgtools.org/