Why aren't you using PGP again, faggot?

because i cant get it to work with trillian

>>61532332
>can't find a pgp compatible program
are you retarded?
you can encrypt and decrypt plaintext and just send it over trillian

File: 1350867101846.jpg (33KB, 460x356px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 460x356px

>>61532291
>Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) encryption program provides cryptographic privacy and authentication for data communication.

>cryptographic privacy and authentication
>on a public anonymous site

Nigger, don't drop out of school.

>>61532346
Not saying use pgp on 4chan dipshit

>>61532377

Who else do you communicate to?

>>61532434
Friends, girlfriend, coworkers, clients

>>61532343

easier to just use trillian without pgp if you say i have to use text progream too

>>61532291
Because it's non-free software. Why would you trust your data to a non-free shitware?

>>61532291
backdoored

>>61532445
Delusions aren't health.

>>61532464
evidence?
As far as I can tell the PGP software suite relies on already proven and safe cryptosystems like RSA.

>>61532711
It's non-free
It's owned by a shady company
The two above show that they probably get paid by the nsa to backdoor it

botnet

what?

>>61532774
>OpenPGP
>GnuPG
???

>>61533248
don't you think both open and gnu have been paid MULTIPLE times by both w3c and yahoo to add bug in their code? dont be retarded, kid

>>61533248
PGP != OpenPGP
PGP != GPG

>>61533281
try again, sweetie

>>61533292
Are you legitimately retarded?

Because I use OTR and I'd rather just use RSA + AES with my own KDF for file encryption.

>>61533403
>RSA
lol

>AES
lmao

>my own KDF
enjoy messing it up

>>61532346
you don't have to sign

>>61533271
Which is why the dev of GnuPG started a fundraising campaign because he only was receiving 1/3 od the amount of donations needed to support his work, after numerous other dev stopped being paid as a result of lack of funds
>https://www.gnupg.org/donate/index.html

>>61533281
They're all compatible with each other though, so for all intents and purposes they kinda are.

>>61533632
>GnuPG
It is a huge pile of shit, have you seen the bugs and the stubbornness of the main dev?

>They're all compatible with each other though
And? The OP was talking about PGP.

>>61533645
Second point is understandable. Fuck PGP, and fuck Symantec

>>61533430
I'm certain you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, but please. Expand on your point of view.

>>61533837
RSA is one of the worst algorithms for asymmetric encryption and signing currently in use.
AES is a complex outdated crap that's both weaker than the competition and vulnerable to side channel attacks of different kinds.
As for designing your own KDF, this should be self-explanatory.

>>61532456
U wot m8?

https://www.gnupg.org/

>>61533861
Can't you read? OP said PGP, not GnuPG.

>>61533850
>It's bad and I don't understand why, but I'm going to act smug anyway

Anything else?

>>61533879
Whom are you quoting?
If you were unable to comprehend what I said you could just ask, but you decided to be a huge faggot instead.

>>61532456
>>61533868

>complaint about non-free software
>get compatible free alternative
>continue to complain about non-free software

>>61533902
Sure, there are free alternatives. How does that make PGP free exactly?
OP asked why we are not using PGP, he did not ask why we are not using GnuPG. I simply replied to the OP and explained to the rest of the ignorant faggots that no matter what they think PGP is still not free.

>>61533894
Let's hear a better suggestion than AES, please. One that has no known attacks, and has been audited extensively.

There's nothing wrong with stacking KDFs, either.

Explain what you were referring to about RSA exactly.

>>61533930
It doesn't matter if the original PGP is non-free. Anyone with half a brain could tell OP is referring to the standard.

>>61533934
That is, no known attacks aside from the obvious dictionary, brute force, and direct memory access to keys.

>>61533986
So yeah, there is no known effective attack if you don't use a retarded password for encryption. Unless you have 5000 years to spare.

What is the best software for Windows to encrypt larger files?

>>61533934
>Let's hear a better suggestion than AES, please
I would suggest Chacha20 or sponge-based ciphers (NORX/Keyak or just Keccak) but there are also Threefish and Serpent.

>There's nothing wrong with stacking KDFs, either.
In the previous message you were talking about making KDFs, now you talk about stacking them, please explain exactly what you had in mind.

>Explain what you were referring to about RSA exactly.
1: the signatures used in most popular RSA implementations are non-deterministic
2: breaking RSA has not been proved to be as hard as integer factorization, unlike algorithms like Rabin or Schmidt-Samoa
3: not secure against quantum attacks
4: difficult to protect against side-channel attacks
5: slow
If you do not care about 3 you should probably use an EdDSA-based scheme instead.

>>61533959
The standard is called OpenPGP, this is what people with half a brain say when they refer to the standard.

>>61534110

>NORX/Keyak or just Keccak

Which software has these implemented?

>>61534165
>Keccak
Every SHA-3 implementation?

>>61534208

Okay, thank you.
So it's not for encryption, right?
Also, can you please tell me a good program to encrypt larger files?

>>61534248
>So it's not for encryption, right?
You can be used it as such, better than AES surely.

>Also, can you please tell me a good program to encrypt larger files?
I only know of GnuPG and OpenSSL/LibreSSL but both suck dicks. I would suggest to use libgcrypt/libsodium/whatever directly instead.

>>61534300
>libgcrypt/libsodium/whatever
Thank you.
But is there also something more userfriendly for windows-users like me?
Is PeaZip any good?

>>61534416
>windows
No idea desu, I would either try GPG on cygwin or 7zip.

>>61534434
Okay, thank you very much.

>>61534416
cleopatra or whatever i think?