also sprach Daniel Kahn Gillmor <d...@fifthhorseman.net> [2017-06-16 02:44 +0200]: > Does it make sense to keep this architectural parallel clean, when it > makes the user's mental model more complex? or would it make sense to > try to map the simpler mental model to the underlying architecture, and > have gpg-agent forward its configuration to the smartcard via scdaemon? > > Particularly when the user's configuration says "be more conservative > about caching" it seems unfriendly to ignore that directive when we know > that we could (since the scdaemon access is filtered through gpg-agent > itself).
I completely concur. IMHO, at least the max-ttl setting should be imposed as card-timeout (it it worked…) -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> @martinkrafft : :' : proud Debian developer `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems "when a gentoo admin tells me that the KISS principle is good for 'busy sysadmins', and that it's not an evolutionary step backwards, i wonder whether their tape is already running backwards."
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital GPG signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)
