Anyone know what became of the Gaim-E Project?
reynt0 at cs.albany.edu
Tue Nov 4 23:11:02 CET 2008
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
. . .
> signatures. They're very useful when you have:
> * a correct signature
> * from a validated key
> * belonging to someone you trust
> If any of those three conditions fail, I think digital signatures are
> pretty much useless. Given how specific and exacting the "useful"
> conditions are, I think the only conclusion to draw is that in the
> general case digital signatures are magic crypto fairy dust. Sprinkle a
> little on and you're safe from identity theft, message fraud and other
> tampering! Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!
You could say, if when evaluating signed content you find any
of these failing, it's a clue to be even more prudent. That
is, a strategy of teaching the prudence skill, and then adding:
what are activators to be alert for? Ie, in this environment,
crypto signatures give some activators, and are definitely
better than nothing. Like in the animal kingdom, rustling
sounds from the grass over there is an activator for the deer
to be more prudent. :-)
More information about the Gnupg-users