Skip to content

AI Policy

AI coding tools help build GpgFrontend. They never touch your keys, and they do not write the encryption. Every change is planned and checked by a person before it reaches you.

This page explains how that works, so you can judge it for yourself.

If you only read one thing, read this table.

Your question Answer
Is there AI inside the app? No. There is no AI feature of any kind.
Does anything I do get sent to an AI? No. There is no AI service in the app to send it to.
Did AI write the encryption? No. GnuPG and rPGP do that, and the app has no crypto of its own.
Was this app designed by AI? No. It has been built by hand since 2021.
Is AI used at all, then? Yes. It helps write ordinary code, tests and documentation.

GpgFrontend was not made by asking a machine for an app.

Work started in May 2021. About two thirds of all changes were written before any AI tool touched the project, and so was the whole design. The parts that keep the app safe were designed and written by hand:

When What
2021 The core was thrown away and rewritten from scratch. This is why the version number jumped to 2.
2023 The module system, which lets parts of the app be built and loaded separately.
2025 A full security overhaul in v2.1.9, covering how keys are stored, protected in memory, and rotated.

That work came from years of reading and studying, as described in the maintainer’s article “The Past and Present of GpgFrontend”.

GpgFrontend is also not the biggest system its maintainer has worked on. Behind it are years of backend engineering on far larger systems, and graduate study in cryptography, security and computer systems.

That background includes knowing how these AI models work and where they fail. They are treated as what they are: fast, tireless, and confident even when they are wrong.

They are an assistant. They write ordinary code, tests, interface work and documentation, and they help review changes for mistakes.

The first reason for using them is speed. The maintainer estimates that work now goes more than five times faster than before.

The more important change is what gets done at all. Two kinds of work used to be put off:

  • Tests. Writing them is slow and dull, and it was easy to keep postponing. The app now ships with well over a thousand automated tests, around 20,000 lines of them.
  • Interface code. The repetitive part of building windows, dialogs and settings pages. There are 66 of those, and about 53,000 lines of interface code, most of it the same patterns over and over.

That is the trade. The tools do the slow, repetitive work. The maintainer keeps the work that needs judgment: designing how the app fits together, and trying out new ideas.

These limits do not move, and they are the ones that matter for your safety.

They do not write the cryptography. The real work of encrypting, signing and handling keys is done by GnuPG and rPGP. Those are long-standing, independent projects with their own developers, their own review and their own audits. GpgFrontend asks them to do the job rather than inventing its own.

You can check this yourself, without trusting anybody. The source code contains no encryption algorithms of its own. It calls the GnuPG library from more than four hundred places, and the rPGP library from the Rust side. There is no home-made cryptography in it to get wrong, no matter who or what wrote the surrounding code.

They are not in the app. Neither GpgFrontend nor any of its modules contains an AI feature or contacts an AI service. Nothing you type, encrypt, sign or open is sent anywhere.

They never see your data. Development happens on test keys and sample files. Your keys stay on your computer, so no AI tool has any route to them.

Using an assistant does not lower the bar. Every change clears the same checks:

Check What it means
A person directed it What the change should do is decided first. The result is then checked against that, and rewritten if it does not match.
It builds It compiles on Windows, macOS and Linux.
It passes the tests More than a thousand automated tests, around 20,000 lines of them, run against the code.
It still interoperates Separate tests check that keys and messages still work with GnuPG and follow the OpenPGP standard.

Nothing is accepted just because a tool produced it. A change that cannot be explained does not go in.

You are welcome to use AI tools. Two rules apply:

  1. You own what you send. You must understand every line of your patch and be able to explain it. If you cannot, it is not ready.
  2. You must have run it. Build it and run the tests first. Do not send output you have not read and tried.

The same goes for bug reports. Check the problem against the real code and include the steps to reproduce it. A report based only on an AI guess wastes time the project does not have.

For everything else, see Contributing to GpgFrontend.

The project links to an AI-assisted Wiki, generated automatically from the source code by an outside service. It is useful for finding your way around, but it is not written by the maintainer and it can be wrong about details. Use it to get oriented, and check anything important against the source code.

This manual is a different case. The maintainer’s first language is Chinese, and the manual is written in English, so AI tools help turn rough notes into clear English. Every page is read and checked by a person before it goes out. These tools are better at wording than at facts, so the facts here are checked against the source code and the release notes.

Mistakes still get through. If you find one, please report it. Every page has an “Edit page” link, or you can write to the address on the Contact page.

Plenty of projects use these tools quietly. For an ordinary app, that might not matter much.

A security tool is different. If you cannot see how something is made, you are being asked to trust it on faith. This page says plainly what the tools are used for, what they are kept away from, and how every change is checked. That is a better basis for trust than silence.

Being open about using these tools is not the same as being built by them. The design, the security decisions, and the responsibility for this app stay with the person who has been maintaining it since 2021.