On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 08:12:37PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 11:09:09AM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > I do not want to make life any harder for the people signing my GPG key
> > either.
>
> It's a reasonable thing to check whether an email-address is valid
> before signi
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 11:09:09AM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> I do not want to make life any harder for the people signing my GPG key
> either.
It's a reasonable thing to check whether an email-address is valid
before signing it IMHO.
Michael
--
we should propose to rename the FSG to DFSG as o
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 10:04:21AM -0800, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
> Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 03:05:57AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > > which have that address in it.
> > >
> > > I sign a uid when these uid's address is not bouncing and the person who
> > > claim
Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 03:05:57AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > which have that address in it.
> >
> > I sign a uid when these uid's address is not bouncing and the person who
> > claims to belong to this key answers a message encrypted to him sent
> > to the specific uid
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 08:12:37PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 11:09:09AM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > I do not want to make life any harder for the people signing my GPG key
> > either.
>
> It's a reasonable thing to check whether an email-address is valid
> before signi
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 11:09:09AM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> I do not want to make life any harder for the people signing my GPG key
> either.
It's a reasonable thing to check whether an email-address is valid
before signing it IMHO.
Michael
--
we should propose to rename the FSG to DFSG as o
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 10:04:21AM -0800, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
> Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 03:05:57AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > > which have that address in it.
> > >
> > > I sign a uid when these uid's address is not bouncing and the person who
> > > claim
Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 03:05:57AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > which have that address in it.
> >
> > I sign a uid when these uid's address is not bouncing and the person who
> > claims to belong to this key answers a message encrypted to him sent
> > to the specific uid
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 07:26:48PM -0800, Richard A. Hecker wrote:
> Oohara Yuuma wrote:
>
> > When signing a GPG key, is it better to sign all of its uids, or
> > just an uid that I see relevant (such as the @debian.org one)?
> > I usually meet someone, get a hardcopy of the key fingerprint,
> >
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 03:05:57AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> > When signing a GPG key, is it better to sign all of its uids, or
> > just an uid that I see relevant (such as the @debian.org one)?
> > I usually meet someone, get a hardcopy of the key fingerpri
Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> When signing a GPG key, is it better to sign all of its uids, or
> just an uid that I see relevant (such as the @debian.org one)?
> I usually meet someone, get a hardcopy of the key fingerprint,
> the e-mail address and so on, then check it later and sign the uid
> which have
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 07:26:48PM -0800, Richard A. Hecker wrote:
> Oohara Yuuma wrote:
>
> > When signing a GPG key, is it better to sign all of its uids, or
> > just an uid that I see relevant (such as the @debian.org one)?
> > I usually meet someone, get a hardcopy of the key fingerprint,
> >
Hi,
Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> When signing a GPG key, is it better to sign all of its uids, or
> just an uid that I see relevant (such as the @debian.org one)?
> I usually meet someone, get a hardcopy of the key fingerprint,
> the e-mail address and so on, then check it later and sign the uid
> which
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 03:05:57AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> > When signing a GPG key, is it better to sign all of its uids, or
> > just an uid that I see relevant (such as the @debian.org one)?
> > I usually meet someone, get a hardcopy of the key fingerpri
Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> When signing a GPG key, is it better to sign all of its uids, or
> just an uid that I see relevant (such as the @debian.org one)?
> I usually meet someone, get a hardcopy of the key fingerprint,
> the e-mail address and so on, then check it later and sign the uid
> which have
When signing a GPG key, is it better to sign all of its uids, or
just an uid that I see relevant (such as the @debian.org one)?
I usually meet someone, get a hardcopy of the key fingerprint,
the e-mail address and so on, then check it later and sign the uid
which have that address in it.
--
Oohar
Hi,
Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> When signing a GPG key, is it better to sign all of its uids, or
> just an uid that I see relevant (such as the @debian.org one)?
> I usually meet someone, get a hardcopy of the key fingerprint,
> the e-mail address and so on, then check it later and sign the uid
> which
When signing a GPG key, is it better to sign all of its uids, or
just an uid that I see relevant (such as the @debian.org one)?
I usually meet someone, get a hardcopy of the key fingerprint,
the e-mail address and so on, then check it later and sign the uid
which have that address in it.
--
Oohar
18 matches
Mail list logo
