Two questions:
If KSK keys are so bogus as to allow documents to be corrupted easily why are
they still being used?
Assuming a better mechanism exists what is it?
If I had to ask a third question it would be about the lack of documentation.
I assume everyone already knows how this dearth of
Kenneth Stailey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
If KSK keys are so bogus as to allow documents to be corrupted easily why are
they still being used?
A while back, one of the Freenet developers said something to the effect
of if we don't have KSK, then someone would just post an SSK keypair and
Hi, all --
...and then gij said...
%
% Hello support,
%
% I did get one key to work:
%
% freenet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's good.
%
% I received the following:
%
% kiss my ass
That's lame.
%
% *shrug*
Yeah. The problem is that someone else has inserted the same key with
% freenet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
% kiss my ass
I don't know enough about freenet and various types of keys to know if
this would overwrite (be considered newer and thus a later revision
than) the original or if there are simply two same-named keys out there.
The latter is true. KSK keys are
