El lun, 17 de sep de 2001, a las 20:25 +0200,
Martin decía que:
> also sprach Tim Haynes (on Mon, 17 Sep 2001 05:05:27PM +0100):
> > Unless I'm well mistaken, of course... But I'd never trust a key whose
> > fingerprint had turned up in public before.
>
> that's a little ridiculous, isn't it, gi
El lun, 17 de sep de 2001, a las 20:25 +0200,
Martin decía que:
> also sprach Tim Haynes (on Mon, 17 Sep 2001 05:05:27PM +0100):
> > Unless I'm well mistaken, of course... But I'd never trust a key whose
> > fingerprint had turned up in public before.
>
> that's a little ridiculous, isn't it, g
also sprach Tim Haynes (on Mon, 17 Sep 2001 05:05:27PM +0100):
> Unless I'm well mistaken, of course... But I'd never trust a key whose
> fingerprint had turned up in public before.
that's a little ridiculous, isn't it, given that i can use my gpg to
view the fingerprint of your public key, which
also sprach Tim Haynes (on Mon, 17 Sep 2001 05:05:27PM +0100):
> Unless I'm well mistaken, of course... But I'd never trust a key whose
> fingerprint had turned up in public before.
that's a little ridiculous, isn't it, given that i can use my gpg to
view the fingerprint of your public key, which
Tim Haynes wrote/napisał[a]/schrieb:
> Wade Richards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > >A five minute explanation of the principle of a
> > >man-in-the-middle attack, followed by a swift bat upside the head with a
> > >copy of "Applied Cryptography" seemed to do the trick, and he sheep
Wade Richards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >A five minute explanation of the principle of a
> >man-in-the-middle attack, followed by a swift bat upside the head with a
> >copy of "Applied Cryptography" seemed to do the trick, and he sheepishly
> >removed it.
>
> I think that many peo
> "Wade" == Wade Richards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Wade> I think that many people put their fingerprint in their e-mail
Wade> signature to exploit the Internet's archiving capability. If I
Wade> e-mail you my public key, you should not pay attention to the
Wade> fingerprint in the signatur
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 19:42:05 +1000, Steve writes:
>I mention this because a friend/colleague use to send his GPG public
>key to people via email, and then placed his key fingerprint in his
>.sig, in the belief that this would enhance security (not to mention
>his geek-cred). A five minute exp
Tim Haynes wrote/napisał[a]/schrieb:
> Wade Richards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > >A five minute explanation of the principle of a
> > >man-in-the-middle attack, followed by a swift bat upside the head with a
> > >copy of "Applied Cryptography" seemed to do the trick, and he shee
Wade Richards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >A five minute explanation of the principle of a
> >man-in-the-middle attack, followed by a swift bat upside the head with a
> >copy of "Applied Cryptography" seemed to do the trick, and he sheepishly
> >removed it.
>
> I think that many pe
> "Wade" == Wade Richards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Wade> I think that many people put their fingerprint in their e-mail
Wade> signature to exploit the Internet's archiving capability. If I
Wade> e-mail you my public key, you should not pay attention to the
Wade> fingerprint in the signatu
> Then, get in touch with me by some secure means and confirm that
I think rather that "secure" it might be better to say "using some
other means of authentication". "Authentication" can mean a lot of
things, with the method depending on the level of security required (a
phone call to quote the
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 19:42:05 +1000, Steve writes:
>I mention this because a friend/colleague use to send his GPG public
>key to people via email, and then placed his key fingerprint in his
>.sig, in the belief that this would enhance security (not to mention
>his geek-cred). A five minute ex
> Then, get in touch with me by some secure means and confirm that
I think rather that "secure" it might be better to say "using some
other means of authentication". "Authentication" can mean a lot of
things, with the method depending on the level of security required (a
phone call to quote the
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 09:02:31PM -0500, Warren Turkal wrote:
> Is it ok to have your GPG fingerprint publicly available?
Yes.
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 09:02:53PM -0500, Warren Turkal wrote:
> Is it ok to have your GPG fingerprint publicly available?
>
It is not only OK, but encouraged. If one can confirm that your
fingerprint is valid (i.e. by calling you and saying "is really
your fingerprint?"), then it's a safe bet
Is it ok to have your GPG fingerprint publicly available?
Warren
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 09:02:31PM -0500, Warren Turkal wrote:
> Is it ok to have your GPG fingerprint publicly available?
Yes.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 09:02:53PM -0500, Warren Turkal wrote:
> Is it ok to have your GPG fingerprint publicly available?
>
It is not only OK, but encouraged. If one can confirm that your
fingerprint is valid (i.e. by calling you and saying "is really
your fingerprint?"), then it's a safe bet
Is it ok to have your GPG fingerprint publicly available?
Warren
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
20 matches
Mail list logo
