incorporate a new use case: allow sign keys to be optional to encrypt secret for all members

[pedro-nonfree]

related to issue #41 : can we have a setting option to disable the need to sign keys?

I was investigating to incorporate pass/qtpass in my team. But it did not fit the expectations.

I wanted to hide completely the gpg thing. I mean, helping users to install gpg in the beginning and nothing else. I think GPG is used in just two moments:

1. put your password to decrypt secret
2. sign the new member's key

solutions respectively:

1. use a passwordless gpg key
2. making the sign keys not mandatory through a configuration option, but right now this is not possible

With these two points , I think I can completely hide gpg usage and people can start using qtpass-pass and benefiting from it. Then, when people like this, maybe they are more receptive to have a gpg password or to sign keys.

[issue-label-bot[bot]]

Issue-Label Bot is automatically applying the label feature_request to this issue, with a confidence of 0.94. Please mark this comment with :thumbsup: or :thumbsdown: to give our bot feedback!

Links: app homepage, dashboard and code for this bot.

[pedro-nonfree]

Let me show an example,

retroshare, that is currently one of the most secure platforms available [1] is not mandatory to sign keys. I'm asking to add an option to allow bypass the key signature procedure

[1] BEST CURRENT PRACTICE RECOMMENDATION: Despite the usability criticism above, RetroShare over Tor is probably the least bad metadata-preserving social network experience available currently

https://secushare.org/comparison

[annejan]

Since QtPass is part of the https://www.passwordstore.org/ ecosystem. We have to adhere to the basic principles of operation of pass.

But since pass and QtPass use gpg in the backend, it should be possible to configure in a way to lower the required minimal trust level.

I'll look into this when I find the time.