>* A lot of what we call trust is the users believing in the software.  
>Despite the fact that it is indeed essentially impossible for there to  
>be a cryptographic error, crypto is hard to understand. Look at how  
>ill-understood the SHA1 issues are. This is an easy way to give  
>explainable, understandable warm fuzzies to administrators everywhere,  
>and as I said above, it even simplifies error-checking and makes it  
>more reliable.

Another way to look at it is that k= is useless, but it's not harmful,
so it'd be more productive to argue about the warts that are both
useless and harmful.

R's,
John
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

Reply via email to