End to End Encryption SIG - 2021-09-23

16:49:08]<vanitasvitae> As a consequence I'd need something along the lines of : Account Identity Key owns (Device Primary Key owns Device Encryption Subkey and Device Signing Subkey) why do you need separate primary/encryption/signing keys?

> However, currently virtually no OpenPGP implementation supports subkeys of subkeys. > See https://gitlab.com/sequoia-pgp/weird-keys#results (cert-subkeys) yeah that's what I meant when I told you that based on library economy X.509 would probably be the better choice

L29Ah: not every algorithm is capable of signing AND encryption. Therefore OpenPGP can use a signing capable primary key which owns an encryption subkey.

But X.509 is another giant spec :(

can't you just limit yourself to those that can?

these days asymmetric crypto boils down to old-school rsa and dandy ed25519 anyway

In theory you could limit yourself to those, but thats lame :P

Also ed25519 is also just signing right? (EdDSA)

yeah, seems like ed25519 keys are only usable for signing or ECDH, not for non-interactive message encryption

Ed25519 is specifically an implementation of the EdDSA signature scheme. But you can absolutely use plain Curve25519 keys to do non-interactive message crypto. I don't think opengpg does or ever will implement that however.

But last I checked there was talk about implementing X25519 which is the key agreement scheme based on the same curve.