A number of Chrome (and I think also Firefox) extensions include their own local copy of OpenPGP.js for use with various webmail services, including GMail.
WKD (and HKP) depends upon HTTPS without cert pinning, FWIU: https://wiki.gnupg.org/WKD
How does an email client use WKD?
1. A user selects a recipient for an email.
2. The email client uses the domain part of the email address to construct which server to ask.
3. HTTPS is used to get the current public key.
The email client is ready to encrypt and send now.
An example:
https://intevation.de/.well-known/openpgpkey/hu/it5sewh54rxz33fwmr8u6dy4bbz8itz4 is the direct method URL for "[email protected]One thing that I really appreciate is that I can reach ProtonMail support to asked why they flagged my email as spam.
I build an email forwarding service https://hanami.run and when we first rolled out I reached out to them, they explain to me my entire email looks good and problem is probably by the age of domains. A few weeks later our emails are no longer flagged as spam. I couldn't get that kind of support from gmail or outlook.
They also maintain https://github.com/openpgpjs/openpgpjs so I think ProtonMail still deserve some credits
https://github.com/openpgpjs/openpgpjs
Would be one approach. Or, as a link is sent "out of band", I suppose one could simply provide a symmetric key in the email. Not as secure - but might be sufficient.
1) libraries are often too complex for the avg dev: well, crypto is complex and there is rarely a one-size-fits-all solution. however, there are high level APIs that address your issues in openpgp.js (https://github.com/openpgpjs/openpgpjs). problem is that a lot of people try to roll their own crypto if the library does not offer those high level #box() and #unbox() functions. and THAT is a real problem down the road.
2) lack of empathy is really a big problem, which I've articulated here: https://blog.whiteout.io/2015/01/29/why-alice-has-a-problem-...
https://github.com/openpgpjs/openpgpjs
And how do you operate without RSA using PGP? I am confused. SHA-512 is for hashing, but not the encryption. The so-called "RSA debacle" does not stop you from using RSA as part of PGP, unless you are using the older (and maybe less useful; I am not a cryptograher) DSA options in PGP. Care to elaborate? Your jokes are cute, but that joke in particular scares me out of trying your service because it shows a biased or garbled technical story here.
Also, we appreciate the mention of the Pax kernel, but TrueCrypt on Linux. Can you go into more detail? I am intrigued why you would choose this over any other software-based full disk encryption system (LUKS+dm-crypt, for example).
Also, FDE of the email servers is nice, but as the sole owner of a bunch of accounts, you can still be compelled to hand that data over, and without hardware-based encryption (and people are more skeptical than ever about TPM chips due to recent news in play), I am not sure it helps. The PGP is nice, but I think you are going to get a lot of snark and rightful skepticism on browser-based JS crypto, which is controversial. I did not say impossible, but many people, me included, do not think this is ready for primetime (some think it never will be, I am staying out of that flamewar).
Nice site, so-so copyright, but there is no silver bullet in this arena and I would prefer your "nerd info" gives better technical detail and a real, real warning about promises you cannot keep.