On Monday, 26 Oct 2015 at 14:45, Nick Anderson wrote:
[...]
> But I guess I don't understand why there would have to be a header for
> each recipient (other than current implementation limitations with
> org-crypt).
>
> Currently the CRYPTKEY property identifies the email address or KEY that
>
Eric S Fraga writes:
> On Sunday, 25 Oct 2015 at 18:39, Nick Anderson wrote:
>> I was playing with org-crypt today and it's pretty nifty.
>>
>> While encrypting things for myself is the primary use case, I have other
>> team members that also use org-mode. It occurred to me that it would be
>>
On Monday, 26 Oct 2015 at 10:21, Grégoire Jadi wrote:
> GPG supports multiple-recipient with --recipient
I stand corrected! Thanks. Interesting hybrid encryption approach.
However, although the main text is not copied, the header (which has the
session key, as it is called, used to encrypt the
On Sunday, 25 Oct 2015 at 18:39, Nick Anderson wrote:
> I was playing with org-crypt today and it's pretty nifty.
>
> While encrypting things for myself is the primary use case, I have other
> team members that also use org-mode. It occurred to me that it would be
> neat if I could specify a list
On 10/26/2015 06:24 AM, Eric S Fraga wrote:
> On Monday, 26 Oct 2015 at 10:21, Grégoire Jadi wrote:
>> GPG supports multiple-recipient with --recipient
>
> I stand corrected! Thanks. Interesting hybrid encryption approach.
>
> However, although the main text is not copied, the header (which
I was playing with org-crypt today and it's pretty nifty.
While encrypting things for myself is the primary use case, I have other
team members that also use org-mode. It occurred to me that it would be
neat if I could specify a list of users to encrypt a node for. Then we
could share an org file
