UI terminology for calculated validities

Doug Barton dougb at dougbarton.us
Mon Apr 28 21:47:50 CEST 2014

On 04/28/2014 12:22 PM, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> On 28/04/14 15:07, MFPA wrote:
>> Such as? Without signatures or "trust-model always" my email app
>> throws an error message and will not encrypt to that key, or even
>> display a message signed by it.
> I was wondering the same thing, but I can think of two more ways:
> - trust-model direct (and then set validity with "trust" command)
> - trust: ultimate (note: don't do this!)
> Still, I doubt Doug meant either of those

... or all of them. :)

My point was simply that signatures don't "activate" keys.

... and I'm not necessarily trying to sway anyone on "verify" vs. 
"authenticate" either. I would be sort of Ok with "authenticate," 
although one could argue that the common usage of that word carries 
connotations that are unattractive for this use case.

One of the origins of this topic was actually regarding Enigmail's knob 
that is titled "Always trust ..." for sending encrypted mail to keys you 
haven't signed. I was thinking through how I would like to phrase that, 
and I came up with "Allow encryption to keys you have not verified" and 
thought that verified/verification was a good general purpose term to 
replace the idea of "validity" and differentiate it completely from 


More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list