The GnuPG implementation was just one of the problems with PGP; Sequoia can't fix any of PGP's real problems while still being a "PGP" implementation.
https://latacora.micro.blog/2019/07/16/the-pgp-problem.htmltl;dr: PGP is absurdly complex, mired in backwards compatibility with broken crypto algorithms, and relies on long-term secrets with no forward secrecy.
In this very blog post, Sequoia PGP explains that they continue to support SHA-1, which was broken in 2005, for backwards compatibility reasons. They've added some code to mitigate the damage (introducing more complexity); they hope to turn off SHA-1 in 2023.
Cool. In the meantime, don't use PGP, not even Sequoia PGP. Use Signal to transfer messages and files. Use full-disk encryption for encrypting backups. Use Minisign to sign packages. Use libsodium for encrypting app data.
EDIT: This post is currently at -3 downvotes without comment, presumably from folks who think SHA-1 is just fine and that I'm overstating the case. I ask you to just read the link I posted and explain why you think PGP is good, actually, despite its terrible reputation among professional cryptographers and security professionals.
"We can’t say this more clearly or often enough: you can have backwards compatibility with the 1990s or you can have sound cryptography; you can’t have both."
tl;dr: PGP is absurdly complex, mired in backwards compatibility with broken crypto algorithms, and relies on long-term secrets with no forward secrecy.
In this very blog post, Sequoia PGP explains that they continue to support SHA-1, which was broken in 2005, for backwards compatibility reasons. They've added some code to mitigate the damage (introducing more complexity); they hope to turn off SHA-1 in 2023.
Cool. In the meantime, don't use PGP, not even Sequoia PGP. Use Signal to transfer messages and files. Use full-disk encryption for encrypting backups. Use Minisign to sign packages. Use libsodium for encrypting app data.
EDIT: This post is currently at -3 downvotes without comment, presumably from folks who think SHA-1 is just fine and that I'm overstating the case. I ask you to just read the link I posted and explain why you think PGP is good, actually, despite its terrible reputation among professional cryptographers and security professionals.
"We can’t say this more clearly or often enough: you can have backwards compatibility with the 1990s or you can have sound cryptography; you can’t have both."