Added a comment
This commit is contained in:
parent
8626f35898
commit
6824a56d09
1 changed files with 36 additions and 0 deletions
|
@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
|
|||
[[!comment format=mdwn
|
||||
username="Atemu"
|
||||
avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/d1f0f4275931c552403f4c6707bead7a"
|
||||
subject="comment 3"
|
||||
date="2021-10-19T13:05:50Z"
|
||||
content="""
|
||||
> Mostly people pick on gpg's public key crypto implementation, and mostly I think, because public key crypto is easy to pick at. I have not seen many such arguments about gpg that seem very convincing to me.
|
||||
|
||||
Ah, this is not about the underlying algorithms and theories. Those are more than sufficient in our pre-quantum world and, as you said, AGE isn't fundamentally different here.
|
||||
|
||||
What I'm mostly concerned about is the quality of the implementation; especially the non-functional aspects like speed, UI and simplicity (some of which also have security implications).
|
||||
|
||||
> The way git-annex uses gpg for encryption=shared does not involve public key crypto at all, but uses AES-128, which is about as close as there is to a standard for encrypting things.
|
||||
|
||||
The actual encryption is done symmetrically but the encryption of the symmetric key is done asymmetrically if I'm not mistaken.
|
||||
|
||||
This is not what age aims to replace though, it functions the exact same from a high level AFAIK; just with a different implementation that satisfies different goals from GPG.
|
||||
|
||||
> git-annex already links to an AES implementation for other purposes and could probably bypass gpg and use that, but that smells of implementing your own crypto.
|
||||
|
||||
That definitely smells of homebrewed crypto. This is why I would love to see something like age used: It's a pre-made, (supposedly) secure, standardised crypto system/library that you can feed files into and it simply gives you encrypted files back. No faffing about with complex key setups or other brilliant UX anno 1999.
|
||||
|
||||
> AGE does not seem to expose any non-public key encryption, so it could not be used for encryption=shared, I think. (Unless perhaps the public/private key pair were stored in the repo as the shared cipher?)
|
||||
|
||||
I'm not sure I follow, couldn't you just generate an age keypair and simply store that in the repo?
|
||||
|
||||
Does the current gpg-based implementation not do it just like that?
|
||||
|
||||
> I don't like the idea of git-annex supporting more than 2 encryption programs, and even 2 seems like 1 too many. Every one will be an ongoing cost. It's not clear to me that there's enough of a benefit to support AGE, or that it would be the best choice for a +1.
|
||||
|
||||
Me neither and I understand your point but the problem with that approach is that it leaves absolutely no way to migrate away from GPG.
|
||||
|
||||
GPG is a complex beast that will likely need replacement within the next decade and age seems like the most obvious alternative for use-cases like git-annex.
|
||||
Only time can tell whether it actually becomes the new file encryption standard but it seems like the most likely candidate right now.
|
||||
|
||||
"""]]
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue