On Du, 08 iun 14, 23:37:40, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 00:22 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > > > Could you please elaborate on this? > > What should I explain? That signing usually is unwanted? It's usually > unwanted, because there is absolutely no reason to sign mails to a > mailing list, especially when most messages are signed with untrusted > keys. I experience this on many mailing lists, not at Debian user. Mails signed by untrusted keys is a (real) problem that needs to be solved, hence my suggestion to join the Web of Trust.
> Signing a mail to a mailing list IMO is similar to draw up a contract, > when you lend a friend 10,-€. There simply shouldn't be the need to sign > those messages, just because there is one Super-Troll. AFAIK this never > happened before and there's no reason to assume it will happen often in > the future. This Super-Troll is an exception. That's your opinion, but I disagree. I sign most e-mails (even in private conversations) also as a reminder to everyone that email is insecure by design. As far as I'm concerned signing and/or encrypting as needed should be the default, not vice-versa. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
