Global Directory signatures (was Re: GPG wants to check trustdb every day)

Jason Harris jharris at
Mon Jan 3 05:33:47 CET 2005

On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 06:44:51PM -0500, David Shaw wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 03:54:19PM -0500, Jason Harris wrote:

> > Regardless of your particular semantics of "actively bridging keys,"
> > signatures from 0xCA57AD7C are showing up on the regular keyservers.
> I'm fairly sure you understand the difference between "active" and
> "passive", and if not, it should be quite clear from the context.  I'm
> not going to explain it again.
> I'm happy to continue having this discussion, but if you would rather
> play "neener neener neener" games, I'd just as soon pass.  I'd rather
> do something productive.

No.  Determining who (keyholders v. key users) copies keys from to the regular keyservers is not important to me.
It was not clear to me that that's what you've meant, hopefully,
all along.  Likewise, if I haven't been sufficiently clear, I only
care _that_ the GD signatures clutter my pks and SKS databases.

Jason Harris           |  NIC:  JH329, PGP:  This _is_ PGP-signed, isn't it?
jharris at _|_ web:
          Got photons?   (TM), (C) 2004
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 309 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20050102/7f253a15/attachment.bin

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list