1994-03-31 - Zero Knowledge Trust? (was Re: Very funny, Polyanna :-( [namespace pollution])
Header Data
From: hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: bbbf00d627b3063b436b937347bc7b50cf9c3f1aec0f5e03423f74fb2313dc3b
Message ID: <9403311629.AA01618@ah.com>
Reply To: <9403302139.AA07928@toxicwaste.media.mit.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1994-03-31 16:36:59 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 08:36:59 PST
Raw message
From: hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 08:36:59 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Zero Knowledge Trust? (was Re: Very funny, Polyanna :-( [namespace pollution])
In-Reply-To: <9403302139.AA07928@toxicwaste.media.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <9403311629.AA01618@ah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
>However, all of these require some out-of-band communication to make
>sure you have the real key. Unfortunately, *every* Privacy Enhanced
>Mail system has this *feature* (or mis-feature, or bug, or however you
>feel like looking at it).
I feel like looking at it as a necessity. Every system for
dissemination of public keys requires at least two paths of
communication. If there is only one, an interposer can sever the
connection graph of key assurances and create two different key
worlds.
Eric
Thread
Return to March 1994
- Return to “Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>”
- Return to “Graham Toal <gtoal@an-teallach.com>”
Return to “hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)”
- 1994-03-30 (Wed, 30 Mar 94 12:14:50 PST) - Re: Very funny, Polyanna :-( [namespace pollution] - Graham Toal <gtoal@an-teallach.com>
- 1994-03-30 (Wed, 30 Mar 94 13:39:58 PST) - Zero Knowledge Trust? (was Re: Very funny, Polyanna :-( [namespace pollution]) - Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>
- 1994-03-31 (Thu, 31 Mar 94 08:36:59 PST) - Zero Knowledge Trust? (was Re: Very funny, Polyanna :-( [namespace pollution]) - hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
- 1994-03-30 (Wed, 30 Mar 94 13:39:58 PST) - Zero Knowledge Trust? (was Re: Very funny, Polyanna :-( [namespace pollution]) - Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>