| 1 |
On Thursday 25 March 2004 15:28, Jesse Nelson wrote: |
| 2 |
> this is the biggest weaknes with PKI in the traditional sense. Everything |
| 3 |
> comes down to 1 key or 1 set of keys. All trust is centralized. Relying on |
| 4 |
> a few ppl to be "secure" with the keys isnot good imho.. People are |
| 5 |
> inherantly lazy and thinking htat 99% of the time these keys wont be |
| 6 |
> someplace they shouldn't be is using Faith as security, and personally i |
| 7 |
> dont jib with that for a security model |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
I agree, we could easilly have multiple master keys (which would reduce the |
| 10 |
risk, however not mitigate it). PGP keysigning however provides even less |
| 11 |
provable security. Instead it works by having as many people as possible |
| 12 |
verify that you are who you say you are. That is nice, but the only way that |
| 13 |
a third party that I don't know is going to have some kind of trust that I am |
| 14 |
me is when my key is signed by one or more keys that are trusted by this |
| 15 |
third party. To achieve such a web it is required for keys to have a long |
| 16 |
lifetime. Such a long lifetime in gpg sense conflicts with the invalidate by |
| 17 |
default approach which requires shortlived keys. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Paul |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 23 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 24 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 25 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives