[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Duplicity-talk] Encryption password selection

From: Duplicity Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Duplicity-talk] Encryption password selection
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 23:48:30 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0

On 08/12/14 19:58, Cláudio Gil wrote:
> 2014-12-08 18:55 GMT+00:00 Duplicity Mailing List
> <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>>:
>     If you're storing your passphrase in a file, nor are planning to
>     actually remember the passphrase, why not use a keyfile? Seems
>     infinitely more logical (and secure).
> I'm curious. Why would you say that a keyfile is more secure?
> Cheers,
> Cláudio
> _______________________________________________
> Duplicity-talk mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk

1. Can be encrypted, securely, without the private key ever coming out
to play*.
2. Only the signing key needs to be on the PC, encryption key can be
stored safely offline*.
3. A keyfile (2048, 4096, or whatever bit key) is probably harder to
brute force than whatever a human would pick, which normally ends up
being "p455w0rd123", "TheQuickBrownFoxJumpedOverTheLazyDog554" or

*I don't do this, but, I just tested it, it seems to work. Command ended
up looking like:-
>PASSPHRASE="" duplicity --encrypt-key=A75B6459 --sign-key=44B9EBEA
incremental a file://b

Upon decrypting the files in b, GPG asked for the encryption key's
passphrase, despite the fact that duplicity never had access to it
(gpg-agent wasn't up, signing & encryption keys had different
passphrases). This is what my `gpg2 -k` looked like:-
>pub   1024R/44B9EBEA 2014-12-08 [expires: 2014-12-09]
>uid       [ultimate] Duplicity Sign <address@hidden>
>sub   1024R/90AB7AF8 2014-12-08 [expires: 2014-12-09]

>pub   1024R/A75B6459 2014-12-08 [expires: 2014-12-09]
>uid       [ultimate] Duplicity Encrypt <address@hidden>
>sub   1024R/73925D21 2014-12-08 [expires: 2014-12-09]

The subkeys only had their respective properties (90AB7AF8 = sign,
73925D21 = encrypt), and the master key only had the 'certify' property.
I also attempted it with a public key of someone I know (But, don't have
access to their private key), and it worked fine (Although, obviously
couldn't verify it did so because I'm not that person, and asking them
"Hey... can you decrypt this file sent to you?" sounds a little dodgy.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]