On 12-07-21 at 10:05am, simo wrote: > On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 10:36 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > On 12-07-20 at 04:42pm, [email protected] wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:25:05AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > > On 12-07-19 at 02:09pm, Fifty Four wrote: > > > > > So, under what conditions would you give a Level 3 signing to > > > > > a pseudonymous name on a key? I assume a Level 3 signing means > > > > > Full validity? > > > > > > > > Policies for keysigning is bound to the communities that use > > > > them. For Debian the purpose of keysigning is to ensure linkage > > > > between digital identity with a physical and legal identity: a > > > > passport is a strong identifier there and pseudonyms are pretty > > > > much by definition going against the very purpose of the aim for > > > > keysigning there. > > > > > > Well, it's not that easy to assert that passports are strong > > > identifiers.
Debian treats passports as strong identifiers. That's a fact. > > > It's a misconception that has been spread by the usual keysigning > > > party policy, but that isn't that meaningful IMO. Fine. Tell that to Debian, not (only) me. > Jonas, any identification method is only as strong as the members of > the community are able to recognize a legit one from a false one. Most > people do not know how to recognize a true passport from a false > passport, in the Debian community like in any other, except, perhaps, > law enforcement. I agree. That doesn't change the fact that Debian treats passports as strong identifiers. Tell it to Debian, not (only) me. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
