Yes, everyone should upgrade to PQ encryption now. (Re: gpg4win expired code signing cert; please renew.)

[Robert J. Hansen]

> Silently, catastrophically breaching long-term security for people
> who don’t even understand the threat models for retrospective
> decryption is *cryptographic malpractice*.

You and I had this discussion back in January. Your arguments were not
persuasive then; I'm not going to re-engage them now.

> Do you suggest that all of these projects and their developers
> wasted their time?

No. I do suggest that you don't understand.

Your (extreme and silly) position is that anyone who doesn't migrate now
now now is committing cryptographic malpractice.

My position is early adopters and people with highly unusual needs
should migrate immediately, and everyone else should be making plans to
migrate in the next few years. Right now I think 2030 is a reasonable
time to have migrations achieved by. Five years is enough to make a
migration plan, test it thoroughly, retrain your IT staff, have your
help desk update their support scripts, get Legal to verify your
compliance with your obligations, and so on. The existing tools like
OpenSSL, GnuPG, etc., are ready to support your migration efforts.

You are screaming at people to do it now. I am calmly saying this should
be done in an orderly fashion in accordance with best practices.

It is the difference between screaming "fire, fire! Run for your lives!"
and "ladies and gentlemen, the fire alarm has gone off, let's keep calm
and exit the building in an orderly manner, please, no shoving, let's
link arms to make sure no one falls and gets crushed..."

An orderly evacuation saves lives. A panic-driven one results in five
people trying to get through the fire exit at once, nobody's able to get
through it as a result, and ultimately as many people die from crush
injuries as from smoke inhalation.

Likewise, urging people migrate *right this moment* is a guarantee the
migration will be done incompetently, and possibly at great harm to
one's security posture. That makes it genuinely bad advice. This is why
I advocate no one follow it.

> It is the logical implication of your actively attempting to 
> dissuade users from upgrading to a now-standard feature, by
> ridiculing upgrade advocacy as “silly” based on your interpretation
> of NSA-says-so.

I have never dissuaded anyone from shifting to PQC. If you want to begin
your migration plan today, that's great: no time like the present!
Devise a migration plan. Test the plan. Make sure the new system will
work for you. Move deliberately. You have time.

You continue to confuse "Rob doesn't take me seriously and thinks my
advice is silly" with "Rob doesn't understand the risks involved and
wants to prevent the adoption of PQC".

The former is true. The latter is not.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 236 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/attachments/20251016/47f09329/attachment-0001.sig>