[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Duplicity-talk] symmetric key, or public gpg key?

From: Kenneth Loafman
Subject: Re: [Duplicity-talk] symmetric key, or public gpg key?
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:40:10 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20090817)

Paul Harris wrote:
> 2009/10/20 Gregory Maxwell <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>>
>     On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Chris Poole <address@hidden
>     <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
>     > Hi,
>     > I had planned to just use my gpg key for encryption.
>     > Now I'm wondering, will performance be better with a symmetric key?
>     > Even when I use my public key, it still asks for me a passphrase
>     anyway.
>     With GPG a symmetric key is always used for encryption, but in public
>     key mode the symmetric key is random and is stored using the public
>     key.
>     Because the key should be very small compared to your data the
>     performance difference should not normally be measurable.
>     The advantage of public keyed backups is immense: it means your backup
>     process can run without any knowledge of the key, the key is only
>     needed for recovery.
> Really?  I thought duplicity still needed to decrypt the signature files
> during backups, and therefore need the key + passphrase?

With the newest duplicity, the cache (archive) dir is permanent so you
don't need a passphrase.  The local sig files are unencrypted.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

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