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

Re: Keysigning without physically meeting ... thoughts?

On Wednesday 01 June 2005 04:52, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > Right, but they have to get it notarized (or forge a notary's seal,
> > which is a criminal offense, at least in the US) which requires
> > government ID (again, at least in the US).
> A notary doesn't certify that the document you hand them is
> correct. All they certify is that you handed them this particular
> document on this particular date.

Well, the whole point is that they also certify that you are who you say you 
are, i.e. they check your ID.

> > Regardless, how is this different from meeting someone in person?
> The difference would be the deterrent effect. Without it, there's
> absolutely no reason why anybody wouldn't generate throwaway
> identities at whim.

There isn't really any more deterrent if they only one they show their fake 
ID to is me. Make ID, show it to me, dispose of ID afterwards.

Anyway, this has been an interesting thread, because what I am seeing is 
that there really isn't any reason why meeting physically is better at 
building a web-of-trust than alternate methods, if crafted thoughtfully. =)

Wesley J. Landaker <wjl@icecavern.net>
OpenPGP FP: 4135 2A3B 4726 ACC5 9094  0097 F0A9 8A4C 4CD6 E3D2

Attachment: pgptvHz26Radf.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: