On 20.07.2010 16:33, John Goerzen wrote:
> On 07/20/2010 06:37 AM, Michael Fladerer wrote:
>> Hi Lars,
>>
>> On Mon Jul 19, 2010 at 23:47:42 -0700, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>>> (I also hope that I've now verified that my new key is fine, except for
>>> lacking an expiration date. But I hope I can fix that without generating
>>> a new key.)
>>>
>> yes, that's pretty simple:
>
> I'd want to state here that I don't consider a key without an expiration
> date to be broken as such. (Nor do I consider a key *with* an
> expiration date to be broken.)
>
> I don't really buy the argument that an expiration date improves
> security, and think that it may hurt it in some ways.
I totally agree. Key expiration dates has nothing to do with security.
A expired key without a published revocation certificate is not
really "expired" (e.g. it can be rendered again unexpired very
easily, by controlling the private key).
So I think the expiration field risk to confuse the user.
IMHO the only way to have time restricted key is to set-p an
internal Debian keyring policy, removing old keys [5-10 years]
(thus making them invalid for new stuff, but not to verify
integrity of old packages).
ciao
cate
_______________________________________________
Debconf-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-discuss
