North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: FW: public key service

  • From: L. Sassaman
  • Date: Tue Jun 27 13:20:02 2000

Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 27 Jun 2000, Tsolis, Kristen wrote:

> > I'm going to try to keep this operational, but it's hard because you're
> > going to find that support for making a robust keyserver network hinges
> > upon
> > people agreeing that such a service is needed, and many PGP users are
> > going
> > to tell you that such a keyserver violates the PGP trust model.
> > 
> > Discussion in detail as to why that's so is seriously off-topic, and so
> > I'm
> > not going to try to defend the point one way or the other; I'm merely
> > commenting that many PGP users will think it's so, and that's enough for
> > the purposes of this discussion.

I don't think it is. You can't make a statement like that (when every
indication says that the opposite is true) and expect people to "accept
for the sake of discussion" that it is true.

Keyservers are purely distribution outlets. They have no bearing on the
PGP Web of Trust. (You're right that this is probably off-topic for NANOG,
which is why I suggested we move the discussion to keyserver-folks, but I
just wanted to point out that I don't see how/why anyone would think that
a reliable keyserver network would negatively impact the web of trust.
That list can be joined by sending mail to:
[email protected] )

In fact, such a network would improve the Web of Trust immensely, because
signatures and signature revocations would propogate more quickly and

Nothing but good can come out of a stable robust keyserver network.


L. Sassaman

System Administrator                |  "Everything looks bad
Technology Consultant               |   if you remember it."
icq.. 10735603                      |  
pgp.. finger:// |        --Homer Simpson

Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred.