Re: org-crypt and PROPERTIES location

[Peter Jones <mlists@pmade.com>]

Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:
> we don't have a good function for this. Also, it is not so much about
> extracting the contents, more about finding the boundaries.  In some
> ways I think it would actually be better to use a tag for encryption
> instead of a property, because this would allow to encrypt everything
> except the headline.  What about we change this to a tag crypt_KEY?
> Hmm, I am not sure if encryption keys would make valid tags.....

AFAIK, the key ID is only needed for encryption.  The encrypted text
will contain a pointer to the key needed for decryption.

Therefore, I suggest that we do this:

  - Have a defcustom for the default key ID to use (I think it will be
    very common that you'll use the same key to encrypt everything)

  - Allow overriding the key ID in an inheritable property (if you need
    to encrypt a heading using a different key than the default)

  - Use a tag matcher to specify headings to encrypt (another defcustom
    that will be used to find headings that should be encrypted
    before-save)

  - Encrypt everything under the heading, including properties (even if
    the property has the key ID, it won't be needed for decryption, so
    the entire contents can be encrypted)

Am I missing anything?

> I'd very much like to see this improved and stabilized, so that we can
> include this with Org, this would be valuable to have.  I am sure John
> would not mind if you did the final steps with it.  Am I right, John?

I had a private conversation with John, and he's completely open to me
putting the finishing touches on org-crypt and getting it included in
the org distribution.

Are there any org-crypt users out there that want to throw in their
$0.02?

-- 
Peter Jones, http://pmade.com
pmade inc.  Louisville, CO US