Andrei POPESCU wrote: > In hindsight, what was meant as a joke probably came out as mocking, I > apologise for that. > > I'm sure you do know that the public key needs to be made available for > others to be able to send you encrypted messages. > > Of course the *primary* private key should be protected properly. A > Debian recommendation (that I can't find) was suggesting to generate and > keep it on a Tails USB stick and use it only for certifying other keys. > > Day to day work (messages, signing packages, etc.) should be done with > sub-keys instead.
Yes, I recall this from the past. So basically there are two use cases here. What I was reffering to is cases like Snowden or Assange or some investigative journalists who do not survive like Navalni and are not Russians ;-). You are reffering to cases in the public domain, but IMO here it works perfectly well (signing packages or similar) In the use case I reffer to one should take care of his/her life. Exchanging keys via public domain is not what I would do and even so - it was proven "they" are capturing your screen (after you decrypted) and sending it home for further analyses. In the public domain I do not see how the avg. Joe would manage it to stay safe. It is impossible ... most do not care, do not understand or do not have the capacity. I would not bother unless they have the right to vote - and yes they do and so determine your future. So to jump to the conclusion - this form of democracy is counter productive and we should have open debate regarding some better form of democracy - lets say next generation democracy. (Covid-19 also showed that a more totalitarian/military style approach gives better results - and I do not mean China here).
