--- fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 10:43:57AM -0500, Tom > Kaitchuck wrote: > > This is really a non-issue. It is very easy to > secure a single key. > > As someone who has accidently leaked his private > freenet key twice now, let > me assure you that this is even easier to accidently > either leak or lose > said key. Not to mention that your box can get > hacked, or a former trusted > person can go postal (people change, you know... I > change on a weekly basis, > for example :-p)
Ok, we can come up with multiparty signatures, hiearchies of validation, and other nice things, but at the end of the day the validity of data in freenet will depend on keys not being compromised. There are several here who seem to think this isn't good enough. What do you want? a) freesites will never be considered secure enough b) the mulitparty signatures or heirarchies will fix it. This big branch of a thread started because I suggested we distribute freenet via freenet before we distribute linux distributions. How do SUSE, Red Hat, Debian, ect make thier certificates? If it's good enough for them, wouldn't it be good enough for us? __________________________________________________________________ Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de Logos und Klingelt�ne f�rs Handy bei http://sms.yahoo.de _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
