Problem with faked-system-time option

Jerome Baum jerome at
Wed Jun 15 12:23:40 CEST 2011

>> We just need to agree on
>> a name, maybe Werner can confirm we are free to use
>> "timestamp-only at"? What would the value mean?
> Shall I repeat the proposal, or is that a question to Werner? :-)


> "The signer makes no statement about the content of the signed data (may not
> even have been able to read it) but only confirms its existance at the time of
> the given timestamp."

I was referring to the value of the notation. We can set any value so
maybe use it for different "levels" of timestamping (like
certification levels)? Or just blank/null?

Jerome Baum
tel +49-1578-8434336
email jerome at
PGP: A0E4 B2D4 94E6 20EE 85BA E45B 63E4 2BD8 C58C 753A
PGP: 2C23 EBFF DF1A 840D 2351 F5F5 F25B A03F 2152 36DA

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list