You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hey! Once again, this tool is a lifesaver in more ways than one. However, in looking at the code, it appears its designed to only output ed25519 keys (which makes sense given the time it was built).
From what I see, it appears that the key is crafted "from scratch" in compliance with GPG (for later importation). So anyone looking to do the same with the ed448 algorithm would likely have to do the same.
One Workaround Idea I Had
I'm not sure if this would work or not, but I noticed that there was an option to specify a pre-made key.
I'm wondering if I could generate an ed448 key ad-hoc (deterministically), and merely have passphrase2pgp pick up that key & then pipe it into gpg that way.
In your opinion, would this work? Or is this something that would ultimately require re-constructing the entire tool itself? If the latter is true, then I suppose its probably not worth the time - but if the former is, then that would be a pretty great lifesaver.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hey! Once again, this tool is a lifesaver in more ways than one. However, in looking at the code, it appears its designed to only output ed25519 keys (which makes sense given the time it was built).
From what I see, it appears that the key is crafted "from scratch" in compliance with GPG (for later importation). So anyone looking to do the same with the ed448 algorithm would likely have to do the same.
One Workaround Idea I Had
I'm not sure if this would work or not, but I noticed that there was an option to specify a pre-made key.
I'm wondering if I could generate an ed448 key ad-hoc (deterministically), and merely have passphrase2pgp pick up that key & then pipe it into gpg that way.
In your opinion, would this work? Or is this something that would ultimately require re-constructing the entire tool itself? If the latter is true, then I suppose its probably not worth the time - but if the former is, then that would be a pretty great lifesaver.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: