1. GPG/PGP's Fundamental Design Flaws
GPG is criticized as a flawed "Swiss Army knife" with incoherent packet systems enabling exploits like signature confusion and malleability.
"tptacek: PGP's insane packet system, where a PGP message is a practically arbitrary stream of packets... It's a deep architectural flaw in PGP."
"cpach: GPG has been a lost cause for basically decades."
"akerl_: GPGβs issues arenβt cash or developer time. Itβs fundamentally a bad design for cryptographic usage."
2. Shift to Specialized Alternatives
Users recommend purpose-built tools like SSH, minisign, age, and Sequoia over PGP's multi-purpose approach.
"tptacek: Everything is better than PGP... use the real tool designed for that task."
"arccy: ssh or minisign for signing, age for file encryption."
"singpolyma3: Sequoia for example has been doing a great job and implements the latest version of the standard."
3. Maintainer Wontfix Erodes Trust
Refusals to patch vulnerabilities, especially cleartext signatures, fuel distrust in GnuPG maintainers like Werner Koch.
"rurban: trust in Werner Koch is gone. Wontfix??"
"woodruffw: something thatβs been 'considered harmful' for three decades should be deprecated."
"derleyici: Werner Koch from GnuPG recently... [posted on] cleartext-signatures" (noting limited response).