On 06/18/10 12:42, David Shaw wrote:
The danger here is that it might take a long time (minutes+) to realize that
the keyserver and/or network wasn't going to cooperate. This could seriously
slow down many GPG operations.
I've been following this discussion with interest as I've seen problems
related to others not updating keys in the past. However I think David
has identified the same 2 critical problems that I did, non-trivial
amounts of modifications to the keyserver network, and the one he
mentions above. Personally I think better education for users about the
importance of refreshing their keys is a better way to go.
The idea that has been percolating in my brain is a warning message of
some sort when gpg accesses a key that hasn't been refreshed in $PERIOD.
If I understand the keybox idea properly it should be possible to store
the "last refreshed" time in a format that gpg can easily deal with in
line, so hopefully adding a warning won't be too difficult if that's
desirable.
Doug
--
... and that's just a little bit of history repeating.
-- Propellerheads
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/
_______________________________________________
Gnupg-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
