1997-06-13 - Re: Photo ID is not needed for key signings….

Header Data

From: Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
To: “William H. Geiger III” <whgiii@amaranth.com>
Message Hash: e02229c16f86d8578586a851e275a46c8435f4dadbace994dd7d11694b6856a6
Message ID: <v03007874afc71e205651@[207.94.249.152]>
Reply To: <v0300786dafc68637a08c@[207.94.249.152]>
UTC Datetime: 1997-06-13 16:24:25 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:24:25 +0800

Raw message

From: Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 00:24:25 +0800
To: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@amaranth.com>
Subject: Re: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
In-Reply-To: <v0300786dafc68637a08c@[207.94.249.152]>
Message-ID: <v03007874afc71e205651@[207.94.249.152]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 10:33 PM -0700 6/12/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
>In <v0300786dafc68637a08c@[207.94.249.152]>, on 06/12/97
>   at 10:14 PM, Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com> said:
>>If you have a version of the key with no signatures, then you can change
>>the data field and re-sign with the associated secret key.  Since the
>>data field has changed, you properly need to have others re-verify the
>>validity of the binding.
>
>I don't think that any changes that he would make to his key would need
>re-verification provided that he signed those changes. Take the following
>scenario:
>
>John Doe creates a key and signs it:
>
>pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe
>sig                        John Doe (0xFFFFFFFF)
>
>Now 3 other people verify that the key does belong to John Doe and sign
>the key:
>
>pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe john.doe@anonymous.com
>sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
>sig                        Mary Jane  (0xAAAAAAAA)
>sig                        Tom Thumb  (0x11111111)
>sig                        Tiny Tim   (0xCCCCCCCC)
>
>Now John adds an aka to his key and signs it.
>
>pub 2048/FFFFFFFF 01/01/90 John Doe john.doe@anonymous.com
>sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
>sig                        Mary Jane  (0xAAAAAAAA)
>sig                        Tom Thumb  (0x11111111)
>sig                        Tiny Tim   (0xCCCCCCCC)
>aka                        John Doe john.doe@who-is-it.com
>sig                        John Doe   (0xFFFFFFFF)
>
>Since John Doe is the only one who could sign the key with the new aka one
>can assume that the aka is as valid as the original userid.

So if John Doe wants to be known as "president@whitehouse.gov" or "Tim May
<tcmay@got.net>" all he has to do is change the field, and upload the
changed key to the key servers, and all the signatures should remain good?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA







Thread