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

Re: [Debconf-discuss] list of valid documents for KSPs

On 30 May 2006, Frank Küster told this:

> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> wrote:
>> On 30 May 2006, Wouter Verhelst spake thusly:
>>> On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 06:28:32AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>>> On 28 May 2006, Thomas Bushnell stated:
>>>>> Perhaps my just-posted message has too many words to see my
>>>>> point.
>>>>> In the paragraph above, marked >>>, which was written by you,
>>>>> you speak of deception and forgery.  Nothing in the reports of
>>>>> the recent incident involving Martin suggests any deception and
>>>>> forgery.  What about this incident makes you think that any kind
>>>>> of deception or forgery was going on?
>>>> I really think either you are deliberately being obtuse, or
>>>> nothing I can say will get this through to you.  I fail to see
>>>> how one can assert that there was no forgery going on -- do you
>>>> automatically assume that if a shiney laminated document with
>>>> some random issueing authority listed on it is not forged?
>>> What Martin Krafft showed you was,
>> How do I know that person actually was  Martin Krafft?
> This is getting ridiculuous.

        With this I tend to agree.  Your credulity is unbelievable.

> If what I've read about the incident is correct, the same person
> also showed a German ID card with identical information about the
> person.

        Holy batmobiles, man, how can you believe that? You weren't
 there.  How can you assert that there was a real ID by hearsay? Even
 if you go by the blog posting that opened this discussion, most of
 the people rpesent did not see this so called real ID. Even if the
 blog posting was not exaggerated, all you need is a bunch of people
 in cahoots to play a prank to assure you there was an ID -- and you
 fell for it.

        How do you know this is not an ongoing prank to gull the
 community into believing there identiy of the person tunning this was
 not fake?

        The best you can assert is that in your belief such a hoax
 would be unheard of, hard to credit, too much work.

        I would have asserted that a DD would not try to trick people
 into signing keys, and not immediately dovulge such a trick before
 people signed keys -- expriment was over long before.

        I'll post more about hat under a separate title.

One seldom sees a monument to a committee.
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: