On 15.06.22 13:42, Gabor Kiss wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2022, Steffen Kaiser wrote:
>
>> The problem is that the entity processing the data (e.g. stores them) is
>> responsible for deletion the possbility to connect the data to a person.
>> Actually, I don't know in which way one has to prove the ac
Hi,
On Wed, 2022-06-15 at 06:03 +0200, Kiss Gabor (Bitman) wrote:
> And moreover how will I do?
You can parse the file with, e.g., sequoia.
But you surely knew that you can parse the file, so I wonder what you're
trying to convey with your message.
Best,
Tobi
On Wed, 15 Jun 2022, Steffen Kaiser wrote:
> The problem is that the entity processing the data (e.g. stores them) is
> responsible for deletion the possbility to connect the data to a person.
> Actually, I don't know in which way one has to prove the act *legally*
> (aka to be accepted in court);
On 15.06.22 06:03, Kiss Gabor (Bitman) wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2022, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:
>
>> Am I understanding correctly and you're saying that even with the server
>> down he sent the GDPR notice to you?
>
> The last keydump is available yet. However I can't imagine how
> did he find the 16
On Wed, 15 Jun 2022, Tobias Mueller wrote:
> > And moreover how will I do?
> You can parse the file with, e.g., sequoia.
Thanks.
Unfortunately the keydump is kept on an old Debian machine.
I'm not sure I can install sequoia there.
I have to search alternate solutions too.
> But you surely knew t
On Tue, 14 Jun 2022, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:
> Am I understanding correctly and you're saying that even with the server
> down he sent the GDPR notice to you?
The last keydump is available yet. However I can't imagine how
did he find the 16 keys in the 12 GiB compressed binary mess-up.
And moreove
Gabor,
Am I understanding correctly and you're saying that even with the server
down he sent the GDPR notice to you?
I'll laugh if I suddenly receive one for my previous SKS server that ran
and has been offline for several years now. Being a non-EU operator I'd be
inclined to say pound sand.
On
On Tue, 14 Jun 2022, I?aki Arenaza wrote:
> willingness to prove it), he could also use a digital certificate system
> that is operated by the government and legally binding in my
> country[1][2] (both of us are Spanish citizens).
>
> And at my request, he has digitally signed a document -produc
On mar, jun 14 2022, Gabor Kiss wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2022, Klaus-Uwe (Kumi) Mitterer wrote:
>
>> Just my personal legal opinion, but I don't think that they are required to
>> actually control those keys, only to demonstrate that they are the person
>> whose personal data is included the keys'
On Tue, 14 Jun 2022, Klaus-Uwe (Kumi) Mitterer wrote:
> Just my personal legal opinion, but I don't think that they are required to
> actually control those keys, only to demonstrate that they are the person
> whose personal data is included the keys' user IDs.
Google gives several hits for "Luis
Hi all,
Just my personal legal opinion, but I don't think that they are required
to actually control those keys, only to demonstrate that they are the
person whose personal data is included the keys' user IDs.
Just imagine if *I* uploaded a key with a user ID containing *your*
name, street a
> > IMHO Mr. Puerto must show some evidence first about the key to delete
> > belongs to him. Otherwise any impostor can make delete other guys'
> > key.
>
> I thought the same thing and asked him (privately) to resend his request
> in a PGP-signed email, which he did, so this is legit.
Gee. I'm
12 matches
Mail list logo
