On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 11:20:30AM -0400, christophe barbé wrote: > On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 10:11:25AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > Upon rereading, I see what you're asking here. You're worried that if > > you sign a uid that doesn't have his name on it, and he adds another uid > > later that does have a name on it (not necessarily his), this will > > mistakenly be accepted by the DAM as identification, correct? Honestly, > > I don't believe DAM is that sloppy, and I wouldn't worry about it... > > Given how often people complain about the process being slow, I think > > it's clear that DAM takes the job very seriously :) > So you understand my problem. > You think the NM process is flawless in this regard. I don't know that it's flawless, but I'm not going to waste any time second-guessing the process. > Do you think that with all the verifications I have done, I can sign his > key and by this way indicate that I know that this key belong to the > well known person. I think if it's clear that the uid you're signing holds a nickname, and not something that could be a real name, it's ok to sign it. Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpN3YfoLrI9G.pgp
Description: PGP signature