Thank you Daniel, it actually sounds very right. Now that I think about it, storing this kind of data in the public key block isn't so good afterall. I will investigate over this and ask to the right ML next time. Thank you everyone for your help.
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email protected]> wrote: > On 01/19/2014 09:55 AM, Daniele Ricci wrote: >> Ok, so I have to conclude it's implementation specific? >> I'm using a custom user attribute to store something that can change >> quite often (privacy lists for a chat user). What do you suggest? > > I don't know what a "privacy list for a chat user" is. You should > probably try to document what you are trying to achieve more clearly, > and present it in a public forum where people can help you think through > possible ways to achieve it. > > This thread started off by asking about user IDs or attributes, which > seems to assume that this is the only way to provide the information > you're looking for. But an OpenPGP notation (stored within the > self-signature) could also provide that information directly. > > User IDs and User Attributes are for information that you need or want > third parties to confirm and certify. Information in an OpenPGP > notation does *not* need to be confirmed or certified by third parties. > So if Alice wants to indicate something about her preferences about how > to use chat, she can do so in a notation subpacket within her self-sig. > > does this make sense? > > --dkg > > -- Daniele _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
