From: "L. Detweiler" <ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 93 20:33:58 PST
To: Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: Key Servers
In-Reply-To: <9311150425.AA19297@oliver.MIT.EDU>
Message-ID: <9311150432.AA21999@longs.lance.colostate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>> I wonder if anyone would want to start a PGP key server dedicated only
>> to *real* identities. Obviously, there is no such demand with the current ones.
>
>This defeats the purpose for which the PGP Keyservers were created.
>The Keyservers were created to give a *SINGLE* place where you could
>go to request a PGP key for some name (and it doesn't matter whether
>that name is real or not).

<sigh> nobody is interested in preventing pseudospoofing here. the
people who have most maneuvered themselves into a position to aid
future cyberspace are instead constraining it. that's the point, isn't
it? gosh, how could I have been so blind...

>Having a keyserver "dedicated only to real identities" would violate
>the basis for which the Keyservers were originally created.

as YOU conceive them.

>By proposing a split in the Keyserver service, you propose breaking
>the initial assumption under which the keyservers were created:
>Everyone has access to the whole public keyring from any server.

false. There could be a network of `true identity' key servers just as
easily as there is a network of PSEUDOSPOOFED LIES.

> > And please don't start with the `that would be impossible' arguments. A
>> key server that had the official policy `if you register here, on your
>> honor your legal name is what you give, under penalty of public
>> exposure if you are caught' would be enough for me.
>
>It is,
>however, unlikely that anyone will, and I personally will oppose any
>such move to provide a service such as this.

the real question, cypherpunks, is what you would do to THWART,
SABOTAGE, and DESTROY any such system or attempt ... (that is, beyond
your current impressive resume)

>However it is not the job of the Keyserver to provide any sort of
>policy as to the keys it provides.  As I've said, the Keyserver is for
>key distribution, not for any sort of key validation.  

so, Mr. Keyserver, considering that this (your?) software could be used
TODAY to help build up a true identity system, why do you oppose using
it in that fashion? I mean, besides that you are a Cypherpunk.