On 06/22/10 20:44, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, David Shaw wrote:
>
>> On Jun 22, 2010, at 11:02 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
>>
>>> It seems there's two interesting problems which inter-relate.
>>>
>>> The first is PGP corporation's "global directory", which see
On Jun 23, 2010, at 12:03 AM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
>>> Are you sure about that? "clean" strips off useless signatures (useless
>>> being defined as an invalid signature, a superseded signature, a revoked
>>> signature, and a signature from a key that isn't present on the keyring).
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, David Shaw wrote:
On Jun 22, 2010, at 11:02 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
It seems there's two interesting problems which inter-relate.
The first is PGP corporation's "global directory", which seems to operate
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, David Shaw wrote:
On Jun 22, 2010, at 11:02 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
It seems there's two interesting problems which inter-relate.
The first is PGP corporation's "global directory", which seems to
operate orthogonally from every other keyserver I've seen. It
On Jun 22, 2010, at 11:02 PM, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
> It seems there's two interesting problems which inter-relate.
>
> The first is PGP corporation's "global directory", which seems to operate
> orthogonally from every other keyserver I've seen. It's HTTP-only, not
> queryable by a
It seems there's two interesting problems which inter-relate.
The first is PGP corporation's "global directory", which seems to operate
orthogonally from every other keyserver I've seen. It's HTTP-only, not
queryable by any of the open-source clients (in fact, it doesn't support
wildcard sear
