mirrors/git-annex
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages 1 Wiki Activity Actions

fix typos.

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Mesar Hameed 2014-07-19 23:57:04 +01:00
parent 5dac6c3c25
commit 57f735b520
4 changed files with 4 additions and 4 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
doc/tips/fully_encrypted_git_repositories_with_gcrypt/comment_10_4440a80d64c60c7312d5c405d54e607a._comment
View file

@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
Sorry, I ment that the file containing the symmetric encryption key should obviously not be used to encrypt itself, it would be stored in the repository \"unencrypted\" (but protected with a passphrase)
> store a non-encrypted gpg key alongside the repsitory encrypted with it, but then you have to rely on a passphrase for all your security.
> store a non-encrypted gpg key alongside the repository encrypted with it, but then you have to rely on a passphrase for all your security.
Exactly. I think such a mode be a great addition. It might not be as secure as encryption based on a private key - depending on the passphrase strength -, but it would certainly be a lot more convenient and portable (and still much more secure than the shared encryption method).
"""]]

2
doc/tips/fully_encrypted_git_repositories_with_gcrypt/comment_9_3784e0c828cd60b6a9075c2d32d070cc._comment
View file

@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
Then you would need to decrypt the repository in order get the key you need to decrypt the repository. The impossibility of this design is why I didn't do that!
It would certainly be possible to store a non-encrypted gpg key alongside the repsitory encrypted with it, but then you have to rely on a passphrase for all your security.
It would certainly be possible to store a non-encrypted gpg key alongside the repository encrypted with it, but then you have to rely on a passphrase for all your security.
You should file a bug report for the bug you saw..
"""]]