-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Does anyone think it makes sense to enable the copyprevention_bit
when a user specifies the owner_id_build value in their plucker.ini file?
It would seem that these two options go together. If you set the
owner of the document, crypting the string into the header of the Plucked
document, beaming it to someone else will do you (or them) no good, unless
their device's UserID string exactly matches yours (highly unlikely, unless
you're beaming between two devices of your own, both with the same UserID
set for testing).
I'm only asking because I'm trying to pare the logic down in my own
parser here for parsing those templates and rolling my own custom Plucker
documents that may be using or accepting these two values.
It would seem that this makes sense:
owner_id_build ? copyprevention_bit=1 : copyprevention_bit=0
Comments?
d.
perldoc -qa.j | perl -lpe '($_)=m("(.*)")'
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.1.92 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9kjBNkRQERnB1rkoRAj5JAKCgQlJSpRKBgaoWotfiHDUiWCZvGgCgvlHK
tpXMNXx0uSgFpv7VMb3BejU=
=hKo5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
plucker-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.rubberchicken.org/mailman/listinfo/plucker-dev
