Bug list update, 02.12.2002

[Markus Gerwinski]

--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

Miguel Coca wrote:
> > > If someone deletes the default key, I think we should assume he knows why
> > > he's doing it :-) And, anyway, he'll be reminded to create a new one when
> > > the program restarts and no secret key is found (well, it should... doesn't
> > > seem to work right now).
> > That one wouldn't warn the user if he had two secret keys and deleted the
> > default key, but still has another one.
> In that case, the correct behaviour would be to make the other key the
> default one.

I think, even then the user should be warned. And if there were more than two
secret keys before, which one shall be the next default key then?

> > ... I see. So, a key is looked upon as valid, if
> >  - it's signed by someone I've got at least "full" ownertrust to or
> Yes, but that signing key must be valid too.

So it must be signed itself with a key I trust? (E.g. my own one?)

> Also, three marginally trusted keys can validate a key, too.

You mean, three keys definitely belonging to owners I marginally trust?

(Maybe in the long run, we should add kind of a graphical visualization of the
web of trust to GPA...)

Yours,

  Markus

--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE973eO6Sp5Kx1roGARAlKlAKDBs8Ev+MLMvUS4eIttcWBdqbzPsQCgnkPD
Fhf45aAuscIu8z+foMBgBzA=
=2zAs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1--