[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debconf-discuss] using OpenPGP notations to indicate keysigning practices [was: Re: GPG keysigning?]



On 06/23/2009 02:52 PM, martin f krafft wrote:
> Additional metadata, e.g. number and expiration date would
> be helpful.

This would certainly be useful from the smiting perspective, but might
raise privacy concerns if people don't want their passport number (or
whatever) bound to their OpenPGP keys, or even distributed within the
debian project.

> On the other hand, just some clear guidelines that participants HAVE
> TO abide by, would help, e.g. a commitment to a signing policy for
> all keys that are to appear in a Debian keyring.

I think that misses a critical point; i want to use my OpenPGP key for a
variety of purposes both in and out of debian.  I consider it a baseline
tool for managing my digital identity.  While i'm happy to obey
debian-specific guidelines for debian-specific purposes, i have no
intention of obeying debian-specific guidelines for projects outside of
debian, except perhaps by coincidence.

I'm *not* saying that i will sign keys blindly or anything, but there
are scenarios and groups i interact with where it is meaningful and/or
useful to sign a role key, a machine key, or a pseudonymous key, for
example.  If debian makes up some debian-specific guidelines that say
"you must not sign pseudonymous keys", i cannot follow those
instructions without changing my key (or having a debian-specific key
unrelated to my non-debian identity, which seems to defeat the whole
point of the binding).

On the other hand, if debian says "we're only going to accept
certifications with certain well-defined values for the following
attributes for certain purposes within the project", then i can continue
to use my key, and make sure that i follow appropriate guidelines for
certifications that *are* critical to debian.

> I will always challenge the "government-issued ID" due to the vastly
> differing standards across the globe, but "travel document" is
> actually a term that someone uttered earlier, which raises the bar
> a lot higher.

Agreed, though it would be no fun for a DD (or potential DD) who can't
convince her own government to issue her a travel document.  do we want
to exclude those people from debian?

	--dkg

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: