On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 21:43, MFPA <expires2...@ymail.com> wrote: > On Saturday 7 May 2011 at 3:06:16 PM, in > <mid:201105071606.21732.mailinglis...@hauke-laging.de>, Hauke Laging > wrote: > > > > Am Samstag, 7. Mai 2011, 15:54:21 schrieb MFPA: > >> You can't assume. > > > You can very well if you don't claim that for all cases but use this > > assumption for distinguishung between a useful and a useless use if > > expiration dates. AFAIR noone here on the list has claimed that it > > makes sense (with respect to security) to use key expiration dates > > without offline mainkeys. That is an important point in the > > discussion. > > At what point does it become safe to assume that an individual with > expiry dates on their subkeys keeps their master key securely offline?
I don't think you get what kind of assumption we are talking about. There are two kinds: 1. I assume something is generally true, e.g.: I assume the world is around. 2. I assume something is true within this scope, so I don't have to restate the precondition with every statement I make, e.g.: "assuming y < z, and z < x, we can follow that y < x". It isn't really an argument to say "you can't assume y < z, so the point is invalid". -- Jerome Baum tel +49-1578-8434336 email jer...@jeromebaum.com -- PGP: A0E4 B2D4 94E6 20EE 85BA E45B 63E4 2BD8 C58C 753A PGP: 2C23 EBFF DF1A 840D 2351 F5F5 F25B A03F 2152 36DA
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
