Grant Olson <k...@grant-olson.net> writes: > On 03/22/2011 06:37 PM, Jerome Baum wrote: >> >> So, I move my key to a smart card to gain the illusion that it's more >> secure, while it practically isn't (at least not much more).
> Why wouldn't it be more secure? Before my key was encrypted but > available on disk, and available unencrypted in system memory. Now it's > on a specialized smart-card, completely inaccessible to the OS. "(at least not much more)" -- but agreed, much is a subjective this. I'm just saying I think people will have the illusion of "this is as secure as if I had generated it right on the card" -- we're talking about average Joe who uses only the defaults, doesn't read up on what they mean, and has "heard somewhere" that smart cards are double plus good. > Sure, I can't guarantee that the NSA or a Chinese Hacker didn't > compromise my keys a year ago, but I'm still much more secure now than I > was then. Absolutely agreed. We were just talking past each other. -- PGP: A0E4 B2D4 94E6 20EE 85BA E45B 63E4 2BD8 C58C 753A PGP: 2C23 EBFF DF1A 840D 2351 F5F5 F25B A03F 2152 36DA
pgp1fQJ2vTM7o.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
