Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Sync (verified) key-state between two logged-in trusted devices #3173

Closed
Torxed opened this issue Feb 8, 2017 · 1 comment
Closed

Sync (verified) key-state between two logged-in trusted devices #3173

Torxed opened this issue Feb 8, 2017 · 1 comment

Comments

@Torxed
Copy link

Torxed commented Feb 8, 2017

No clue where to post this, and I apologize in fore-sight for my laziness to investigate.

Feature request: Sync verified keys between two/more logged in self-owned devices (ex: Phone to Web).

I know this goes against a lot of common sense, but so does user liabilities and actions.
There's no sane every day Joe Bloke who is willing to go through a room of even 5 people with two devices each and verify them manually one by one. He won't go through the hassle of doing it with his two devices in hand, let alone during IRL meetings with everyone.

If Joe Bloke could go through the pain of verifying keys once IRL, or even with alternative communication methods verified twice - he could then sync the trusted keys and blocked keys between two of his devices by logging on both of them and press a magical button called "Sync key state between device: [dropdown]".

I have no clue if this has been suggested before, but I sure as anything would think this is a security enhancing feature if you know anything about user behavior and how the world actually works. I know it's a rule breaker in a Utopian dystonia at the same time. But give us the option to pick and choose?

@ara4n ara4n changed the title Sync (verified) key-state between two logged-in truested devices Sync (verified) key-state between two logged-in trusted devices Feb 8, 2017
@richvdh
Copy link
Member

richvdh commented Feb 8, 2017

I think this is a dup of #2537

@richvdh richvdh closed this as completed Feb 8, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants