Re: Keysigning as spam
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 05:46:48PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jul 2005, Paul Sladen wrote:
> >I'm quite happy with you sending signatures directly to the keyserver (it
> >boasts my rankings in the Top1000 after all!); however, you yourself may
> >want some assurance that you're not signing daft uids such as
> ><billg@microsoft.com>. :-)
> Well, I checked the documents and there was no person named Bill at the
> party. Moreover I would not see a reason not to sign a person from
> microsoft.com if this person has valid documents and has understand the
> signing procedure (chances for the later part are lower). I just want
> to replace key-signing paranoia by common sense.
There are some people who actually do not want you to send key
signatures to keyservers.
I once met a guy who'd specifically made a PGP key with the purpose of
being able to use it with PGP2. Signing it with gpg or PGP5 keys kinda
made that impossible, because PGP2 couldn't understand some of the later
algorithms.
I agree that this is quite insane to begin with, but still; since that
experience, I consider it polite to send the keys to the owner of the
key, rather than the keyserver.
--
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond
--
To unsubscribe, send mail to debconf5-event-unsubscribe@lists.debconf.org.
Reply to: