From 5620978013f4f77593cafa81f928c69bebadc221 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawl6rte43qSRK1o2zn7Ww4Z8pgBmJm8gDrc" Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 20:20:30 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] --- doc/bugs/feature_request:_pubkey-only_encryption_mode.mdwn | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/bugs/feature_request:_pubkey-only_encryption_mode.mdwn diff --git a/doc/bugs/feature_request:_pubkey-only_encryption_mode.mdwn b/doc/bugs/feature_request:_pubkey-only_encryption_mode.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..af05993d4c --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/bugs/feature_request:_pubkey-only_encryption_mode.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +### Feature request +It is not possible to put encrypted content in place on remotes with just a public GPG key. You always need the private key, even for encryption. I guess this is because how the cipher HMAC is used for replacing file names with their hashes. However, if that requirement (having secret file names) was dropped, I assume a pubkey-only mode could be implemented? + +My specific use case is backup archiving. I have my backups packed in archive files and want to use git-annex to copy the archives to offsite remotes (S3). In that case, I don't care much about hiding file names, but would appreciate the increased security of not having the secret key on the backup server. It would only be needed if I wanted to verify or restore backups.