It saddens me, but I have to agree. Raising interest around PGP encryption is easy, but when it comes to actually using it, that's when people seem to back off quickly. I'm not a developer, so have no idea what would be required, but it seems to me that more focus is needed on making the experience as seamless and user friendly as possible.
Steve -----Original Message----- From: Gnupg-users [mailto:gnupg-users-boun...@gnupg.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Seichter Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 6:23 AM To: gnupg-users@gnupg.org Subject: Re: German ct magazine postulates death of pgp encryption > Your positions to this ct approach? The c't magazine is mostly well respected in Germany and the editors have some valid points; the latest articles are by no means mindless rants or PGP-bashing. The thought of letting PGP die as an e-mail encryption mechanism for the "masses" (the non-tech-savvy average users) and to have it replaced with something my mother could use is valid. The c't editorial also clearly states that PGP works perfectly well and is secure as long as keys are verified, but fake keys and people not verifying fingerprints are a reality. Alice can't just send an e-mail to Bob, she needs to acquire and verify Bob's public key first. Compare this to transparent encryption like Apple's iMessage service uses and it is not hard to answer which mechanism has better usability. I like and use PGP like probably every subscriber on this mailing list, but the number of people I can exchange PGP-encrypted data with is very low when compared to the total number of my e-mail contacts. -Ralph _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
