We’ve been using v1.4 of gnupg because I read in the documentation and user comments and in my testing, that v2.X couldn’t be used in software automation workflows.
This might have been true several years ago, but it isn't true today.
there was a feature (that seemed intentional) that the passphrase had to be entered manually in a popup window in v2.X.
That's true, and is correct. If you're passing a passphrase via the command line, that passphrase becomes visible to anyone with the privileges to get a list of processes and arguments. At that point the passphrase really isn't providing much in the way of security.
And that even when that was supposedly not required, it still happened occasionally to users, that their automation couldn’t process the file because gnupg v2.X required the manual input.
I'm unaware of any instance of this being true. I am aware of *many* instances of people discovering they did, in fact, have a passphrase on their key after swearing up and down they didn't.
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
