From: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 94 22:51:08 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Hazards of encouraging forged dig sigs
Message-ID: <199412010651.WAA21620@netcom11.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

"L. McCarthy" wrote:

>Now that Eric has made it abundantly clear he envisions syntactic but not
>semantic checks of sigs, I am opposed to the proposition. I foresee a
>situation in which a large portion of the list traffic uses forged or
>meaningless signing-server-appended dig sigs.

Perhaps, though I doubt it. I still think that "incentivising" (I just love
this word) the use of crypto on this list will lead to better tools and
therefore to more people in the world at large using crypto. Since that is
what we all want, can't we at least give it a try? There is nothing to lose
and everything to gain.

- -- Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
   PGP encrypted mail preferred.

"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil
interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." <George
Washington>




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6ui

iQCVAgUBLt1xxASQkem38rwFAQGELwP+Ms7eKLCysRTLeLITah2aoGYo1cvrkoNh
XMfv6E7qdLIrwoQaFgaREtFFp3RkTP6lPmzJePgvC4Rkl+SBIKM8eFxgOa3scJ9t
QaEE5D5Rz9zZpD3D13thRQnshk9PdIc8LDv6FoEvfDGXtChEyiXWVUiRTRRJob1b
LZmyV7Hed0Y=
=Uo3r
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----