[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: MIT Keysigner CA
On Sat, 3 Dec 1994, Eric Hughes wrote:
> From: Christian Odhner <[email protected]>
>
> I trust a key to be an introducer if and when
> I am sure that a signature by that key means that the signed key belongs
> to the identity (be it "real" or a 'nym) it claims to represent.
>
> There is a qualitative difference between a real identity and a
> pseudonym identity. A real identity has a body attached to it and a
> pseudonym identity does not. The phrase "belongs to" cannot be used
> in the same sense for both of these, and the failure to discriminate
> between them is a fallacy.
I understand the difference and was not attempting to equate the two,
just save a few words.. :)
> As far as an MIT autosigner, the signature will simply represent a
> reduction to the trustability of the MIT account assignment procedure.
> This is not a reduction to bodily identity and should not be construed
> as such.
That's the point I was trying to make, only you said it a little better.
> Derek.) The signature here represents an attestation that a given key
> (that is, a given identity) can be reached through a particular
> mailbox.
*THAT* is the usefullness that I hadn't realized. Thanks for pointing it out.
Happy Hunting, -Chris.
______________________________________________________________________________
Christian Douglas Odhner | "The NSA can have my secret key when they pry
[email protected] | it from my cold, dead, hands... But they shall
pgp 2.3 public key by finger | NEVER have the password it's encrypted with!"
cypherpunks WOw dCD Traskcom Team Stupid
Key fingerprint = 58 62 A2 84 FD 4F 56 38 82 69 6F 08 E4 F1 79 11
------------------------------------------------------------------------------