On Wednesday 12 May 2010 00:44:37 Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > I'm not suggesting that joke's proposal of > encrypt-to-all-encryption-capable-subkeys is the right choice, but it's > not clear that there's any particular reason to prefer one key over > another (perhaps if you were introducing a new asymmetric algorithm, > you'd want to keep your old RSA encryption key around for users who > don't have support for the new algorithm).
The encrypt-to-all-encryption-capable-subkeys ensures that the owner of the primary key will always be able to decrypt the message no matter what (not- revoke) encryption key secrets he can access at the moment. And since it's his primary key the message is intended to read by him.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
