Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse) (WAS: Re: The pool is shrinking)

On 8/20/19 6:05 AM, Tobias Mueller wrote: (SNIP) >> This means not only are keydumps allowed for research (§2), but the >> SKS in general (ESPECIALLY US servers and operators, which I'll get to >> in a moment) is exempt - we provide "...archiving purposes in the >> public interest" (§3). Frankly

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse) (WAS: Re: The pool is shrinking)

Hi, On Fri, 2019-08-16 at 19:28 -0400, brent s. wrote: > SO for starters, please keep this off the "pool is shrinking" thread. > I'd like to see that thread relevant to resolving resiliency issues of > the SKS network, given that's the actual purpose behind starting that > thread. GDPR is

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse)

Todd Fleisher wrote: > Thanks for providing these links, I'll have to check them out. I haven't used > an anonymous remailer since anon.penet.fi went dark over two decades ago > > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penet_remailer You're welcome! Yes, good old penet. ;-) Regards Stefan -- box:

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse)

> On Aug 17, 2019, at 18:00, Stefan Claas wrote: > > Todd Fleisher wrote: > >>> On Aug 17, 2019, at 8:46 AM, Stefan Claas >> > wrote: >>> >>> Anonymity is a very important point when one likes to communicate securely >>> and anonymously! >>> >>> For that purpose

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse)

Todd Fleisher wrote: > > On Aug 17, 2019, at 8:46 AM, Stefan Claas > > wrote: > > > > Anonymity is a very important point when one likes to communicate securely > > and anonymously! > > > > For that purpose Anonymous Remailers with a Nym account are in service > > for

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse)

On 8/17/19 4:44 PM, Tobias Frei wrote: > > > On Aug 17, 2019 19:11, Stefan Claas wrote: > > Interesting! If understood correctly the advantage then would be no > changes > > in the SKS code and simply using a front-end key parser, with a > defined rule > set, right? > >

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse)

> On Aug 17, 2019, at 8:46 AM, Stefan Claas > wrote: > > Anonymity is a very important point when one likes to communicate securely > and anonymously! > > For that purpose Anonymous Remailers with a Nym account are in service > for many years. It requires on the users

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse)

On Aug 17, 2019 19:11, Stefan Claas wrote:Interesting! If understood correctly the advantage then would be no changes in the SKS code and simply using a front-end key parser, with a defined rule set, right? And false positives. And ineffectiveness against new attacks. And vulnerability through

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse)

brent s. wrote: > On 8/17/19 11:46 AM, Stefan Claas wrote: > > The other points you have mentioned, like the signer cannot upload a key, > > well that's true but I wonder how you guys like then to solve the problem > > with uploading flooded key material to the key servers. I think you can > >

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse)

On 8/17/19 11:46 AM, Stefan Claas wrote: > Anonymity is a very important point when one likes to communicate securely > and anonymously! > > For that purpose Anonymous Remailers with a Nym account are in service > for many years. It requires on the users side that he / she is familiar > with GPG,

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse)

brent s. wrote: > I'm going to anticipate what you're suggesting this solves - that only > key owners can upload their own key by ensuring the sender matches one > of the key's identities. There's flaws with that: > > 1.) You've now broken the ability to upload keys with no real > identifiable

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse) (WAS: Re: The pool is shrinking)

On 8/17/19 8:08 AM, Stefan Claas wrote: > brent s. wrote: > >> 4.) *Real* identifiable personal information is by *no means* a >> requirement for the creation of a key, nor making it available on a >> keyserver. Granted, you're going to face some challenges at a >> traditional keysigning party,

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse) (WAS: Re: The pool is shrinking)

brent s. wrote: > 4.) *Real* identifiable personal information is by *no means* a > requirement for the creation of a key, nor making it available on a > keyserver. Granted, you're going to face some challenges at a > traditional keysigning party, but simply How about email submission like we

Re: [Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse) (WAS: Re: The pool is shrinking)

> IANAL, but only one person in this discussion has mentioned that they > HAVE consulted one that specializes in data privacy - who confirms that > specifically, for a US keyserver operator operating a US keyserver, GDPR > has *absolutely no bearing* even if we *weren't* exempt. Minor nit: that

[Sks-devel] GDPR (equine corpse) (WAS: Re: The pool is shrinking)

SO for starters, please keep this off the "pool is shrinking" thread. I'd like to see that thread relevant to resolving resiliency issues of the SKS network, given that's the actual purpose behind starting that thread. GDPR is off-topic to that thread and, quite frankly, it's getting *extremely*