[81691] in Cypherpunks
Re: Photo ID is not needed for key signings....
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tim May)
Thu Jun 12 22:24:07 1997
X-Real-To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
In-Reply-To: <v03007868afc5c5dd69c9@[207.94.249.152]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 18:47:41 -0700
To: Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>,
"Joshua E. Hill" <jehill@w6bhz.calpoly.edu>
From: Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
Cc: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Reply-To: Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
At 8:31 AM -0700 6/12/97, Bill Frantz wrote:
>IMHO - What you are really signing is the binding between the data
>associated with the key (usually an email address) and the key. You are
>saying that the secret key holder is (one of the) person(s) who has access
>to that account, and not some man in the middle in the middle. If you ask
>to see Lucky Green's, or Futplex's, or Black Unicorn's picture ID, you will
>either see a forgery or an ID issued by an organization not interested in
>birth certificates.
I am fairly often accused of being arrogant, of being a "know it all." I
have never claimed to be an expert on PGP, and I certainly am not. I use
the MacPGP version which became available in '92, and will eventually star
t working with PGP 5.x (which I have, and have installed, but not spent
much time with).
I generated a 1024-bit key in '92, right after PGP 2.0 appeared, and
participated in a key signing, etc., shortly thereafter. It happened that
my ISP at that time had just changed from Portal to Netcom. (Now it's
"got.net", a fairly typical local provider of non-shell ISP services.)
I can't understand (hint: someone please explain) why I get so many
requests to send the "tcmay@got.net" key, as opposed to the
"tcmay@netcom.com" key so widely available. I thought the key signings were
about the Person Widely Known as "Tim May" being associated with the key
signed, not some temporary e-mail address.
My binding was between the key, and "me." Those who wanted to send messages
to "me" could assume that only "I" could read it. The address
"tcmay@netcom.com" vs. "tcmay@got.net" is not central. Any concern that
"tcmay@got.net" is somehow not the keyholder of that '92 key is a nonissue.
If the keyserver databases focus on such ephemera as the current ISP
account, then they are focussing on the wrong things.
Am I missing something central?
--Tim May, whose e-mail deliverer has changed a few times, but whose key
remains constant. Which is more important?
There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
