> No, that is *one of* the game-over conditions; it is not *the* game-over > condition.
[a lot of stuff I agree with snipped] Please re-read the thread. You'll see you're agreeing with Peter Lebbing and me. We've consistently maintained smart cards are useful in a number of use cases and threat models -- but they do not rise to the level listo is ascribing to them. > There are a > few possible attacks that the use of a smartcard mitigates, and > therefore a smartcard key *is* more secure than a non-smartcard key No. It's more secure *only if those attacks are within your threat profile*. Wearing a parachute gives me additional security against, say, aircraft disasters. But if I don't fly anywhere, it's just an inconvenience which offers me no additional security. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
