Am Di 22.04.2014, 23:40:40 schrieb Peter Lebbing: > Oh wow. I understand you can make any topic as difficult as you want > if you put some effort into it,
We do agree that crypto is by its nature difficult (I don't mean the math I mean the organizational envorinment) and that a serious part of this difficulty is more or less hidden by current tools (in order not to scare the users away), don't we? > but are there seriously people who > have different keys for different levels of identity verification? The answer seems to point to the wrong direction as, of course, having only one (active) key (per address) which is probably the situation for the majority of OpenPGP users, is just another problem as you cannot cover the spectrum of common security needs with just one key. You can even see that on this list where several people do not sign their email. In at least one case due to the rather strange argument that this would imply a higher "security" of the message than it really has. The reality is that this ignores the real problem: The lack of transparency of the security level (German only: http://www.crypto-fuer-alle.de/wishlist/securitylevel/). Thus we should head for most users having several keys. But as dkg has just pointed out (his suggestion to handle groups of keys belonging to the same person or organization has already been on this list years ago): We are technically not yet equipped for handling this. On the other hand: The current WoT is of little use anyway. But if this is supposed to change in e.g. five years we have to start to change something now. Hauke -- Crypto für alle: http://www.openpgp-schulungen.de/fuer/unterstuetzer/ http://userbase.kde.org/Concepts/OpenPGP_Help_Spread OpenPGP: 7D82 FB9F D25A 2CE4 5241 6C37 BF4B 8EEF 1A57 1DF5
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
