cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1995-02-12 - Re: the problem that destroyed PGP

Header Data

From: “W. Kinney” <kinney@bogart.Colorado.EDU>
To: perry@imsi.com
Message Hash: 3ee6ecf64803f32d6757473220e74669044bedc0c08ebf26e8dae7b9c1c93243
Message ID: <199502121810.LAA12147@bogart.Colorado.EDU>
Reply To: <9502121802.AA19017@snark.imsi.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-12 18:10:30 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 12 Feb 95 10:10:30 PST

Raw message

From: "W. Kinney" <kinney@bogart.Colorado.EDU>
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 95 10:10:30 PST
To: perry@imsi.com
Subject: Re: the problem that destroyed PGP
In-Reply-To: <9502121802.AA19017@snark.imsi.com>
Message-ID: <199502121810.LAA12147@bogart.Colorado.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Perry Metzger writes:

> I think the jury is still out on that. Web-of-trust is still really
> untested because of the difficulties in widespread deployment of
> PGP. As it stands, PGP is still a hacker's toy -- the lack of a

Perhaps you're right. Your argument here, as I see it, is that web-of-trust
becomes _more_ functional as it becomes adopted on a larger scale. This
might end up being true and it might not, although there seems to be
no evidence as of yet of increasing "connectivity" of signatures as PGP
becomes more widely used, which was the point I was trying to make. The
unresolved question is whether or not there will be a critical point at
which the web will become widely connected. The answer does not seem at
all clear to me.

                               -- Will

Thread