[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 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------