At 2:15 PM -0400 6/13/02, Stephen Kent wrote: [snip]... [snip]... [snip]... [snip]... [snip]... [snip]... [snip]... [snip]... > >You are the one who keeps saying that trust is transitive. I'm the >one saying that it's not, and that a DNS-based PKI does not imply >transitive trust. > ><rest of message deleted, since it didn't say anything new, >constructive, or generally relevant to the topic ... > >Steve
I am simply astounded. Where in my texts have I said that trust is ever transitive. I asked on for an explanation of why some in this list think trust is transitive. And I cited the only instance I can think of where it might be transitive by mutual agreement between a SPY and her handler! But this is not to be construed as my "saying that trust is transitive." If you can find he message and the text where I state that trust is transitive. please return the message to me so I can compare it with the copy of it that I kept in my outgoing mail folder. For clarity, I will now more simply restate my QUESTION: Explain for me (and others here) how trust is ever transitive! That is what I am really driving at. I don't think you can prove it. Cheers...\Stef
