-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Psy-Kosh wrote:
>
>
> Not to mention that anyone can sign keys, independant of the will of the
> key's owner. (I think a protocol to actually remove unwanted sigs from a
> key may be useful. (ie, a way to have the removal propagated by the
> keyserve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Just wondering (as you do)... as great as it is signing other people's
keys, someones public key does actually reveal quite a lot about the
real world movements and aquaintances of the keyholder as it accumulates
signatories does it not
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, Bill Thompson wrote:
> Yes, but if you want to remain anonymous what is the point of
> cryptographically signing your e-mail? You can't have it both ways.
Sure you can. Read up on anonymous and pseudonymous mail systems. But
that's not the danger what Shaun was talking about.
Bill Thompson wrote:
>Yes, but if you want to remain anonymous what is the point of
>cryptographically signing your e-mail? You can't have it both ways.
Assuring a mail comes from the same (unkbown) sender. The cracker of the
"improved" MS DRM system used it this way: his mails (actually, newsgro
Bill Thompson wrote:
Yes, but if you want to remain anonymous what is the point of
cryptographically signing your e-mail?
Guarantee of continuity of particular communication thread
(as opposed to the guarantee of correspondent's identity).
C. Rok
__
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 12:13:02 +0100
Shaun Lipscombe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just wondering (as you do)... as great as it is signing other people's
> keys, someones public key does actually reveal quite a lot about the
> real world movements and aquaintances of the keyholder as it accumulates
>
Shaun Lipscombe wrote:
Just wondering (as you do)... as great as it is signing other people's
keys, someones public key does actually reveal quite a lot about the
real world movements and aquaintances of the keyholder as it accumulates
signatories does it not?
The main purpose of Web-of-trust i
