Best practice for periodic key change?

Jean-David Beyer jeandavid8 at
Sat May 7 19:16:20 CEST 2011

Jerome Baum wrote:
> On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 15:54, MFPA <expires2011 at
> <mailto:expires2011 at>> wrote:
>     (snip huge email)
> Next time can you read the whole email and reply to it as a whole?
> As for signature checking, I stand by my point: Over here, signing a
> document today and claiming on the signature that it was signed tomorrow
> is going to be an offense (if there is a loss to a third party, of
> course -- a lie isn't fraud until there is damage).
> The post-dated cheque doesn't say "I signed this in the future", but
> "only accept this from that point in the future". That's a big
> difference. As for the clerk, he's an idiot and probably liable for
> accepting it. It's not my problem if people don't check the signature
> timestamp, I can only do my part on making the date accurate -- plus
> maybe educating my recipient on checking the timestamp.
When I was on a grand jury, the prosecutor said that while the words of
the law made it illegal to write a post dated check (in this state),
that they did not prosecute for this unless there was intent to commit a
fraud, and that is difficult to prove.

A friend who worked at a bank said they never looked at the dates, but
cashed them when presented unless there were insufficient funds to honor
them. So there is no use in writing a post dated check unless the person
to whom it is presented holds on to it until the date.

As treasurer of a tax deductible organization, I use the date on the
check as the date of the donation except sometimes I do not. I do not
when it is dated something late in December, but postmarked mid January
or later. In that case, I use the postmark date.

So people writing pre-dated or post-date checks are wasting their time.

  .~.  Jean-David Beyer          Registered Linux User 85642.
  /V\  PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A         Registered Machine   241939.
 /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey
 ^^-^^ 13:10:01 up 21 days, 16:28, 3 users, load average: 4.57, 4.78, 5.01

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list