From: Carl Ellison <cme@clark.net>
To: ecarp@netcom.com
Message Hash: a8e7f142fd0b3686adf79e8648de795d52fae540f41bb2f5ac899cfbba338bd7
Message ID: <199511240500.AAA07836@clark.net>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-11-24 05:28:39 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 13:28:39 +0800
From: Carl Ellison <cme@clark.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 13:28:39 +0800
To: ecarp@netcom.com
Subject: establishing trust
Message-ID: <199511240500.AAA07836@clark.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
>From khijol!erc@uunet.uu.net Thu Nov 23 16:21 EST 1995
>From: "Ed Carp [khijol SysAdmin]" <khijol!erc@uunet.uu.net>
..so..why the UUCP style address?
>Subject: Re: crypto for porno users
>To: khijol!clark.net!cme@uunet.uu.net (Carl Ellison)
>Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 15:57:17 -0600 (CST)
>Cc: khijol!got.net!edge@uunet.uu.net, khijol!toad.com!cypherpunks@uunet.uu.net
>
>totally different from this "web of trust" I keep hearing about - and that is
>*it*. Do you trust me any more now than before I started signing my postings?
Actually, in my view, signed postings are the first step. With those (and
the right S/W (not there yet)), I get to know that a bunch of postings came
from the same person. I even know who they came from: the person who
is capable of signing with key 0xXXXXXXXX.
Since the only way I have of getting to know the person is through those
postings, I get to know that person and through that knowledge I decide
whether or not to trust.
And, yes, I can be fooled.
- Carl
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carl M. Ellison cme@acm.org http://www.clark.net/pub/cme |
|PGP: E0414C79B5AF36750217BC1A57386478 & 61E2DE7FCB9D7984E9C8048BA63221A2 |
| ``Officer, officer, arrest that man! He's whistling a dirty song.'' |
+---------------------------------------------- Jean Ellison (aka Mother) -+
Return to November 1995
Return to “Greg Rose <Greg_Rose@sydney.sterling.com>”