| 1 |
On Monday 26 May 2008, Daniel Iliev wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 25 May 2008 20:04:29 +0200 |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Wolf Canis <wolf.canis@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Mick wrote: |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> > > There are other lists however, when |
| 8 |
> > > it is not that rare for malicious (or unhinged) individuals to |
| 9 |
> > > impersonate someone else and hijack their email address to publish |
| 10 |
> > > offensive content. After a while using a digital signature (GnuPG |
| 11 |
> > > or x509) becomes a habit. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > That's exactly the case. ;-) |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Two questions. |
| 16 |
> How would signing your emails to this list help you: |
| 17 |
> - in avoiding the above to happen to you? |
| 18 |
> - help you in case that happens after all? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Explain, please. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
The reason I have given above does not apply as much to this list (so far). |
| 24 |
In any case, the principle is that unless I have signed this message you |
| 25 |
cannot be sure that it was authored/sent by me and as a matter of course you |
| 26 |
should assume that it was sent by someone else. You can then trust/distrust |
| 27 |
the content of the message and the potential impact of any advice offered in |
| 28 |
it accordingly. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
As far as this list is concerned singed messages don't cause any harm. Once |
| 31 |
you set your client to sign messages, that's what it does . . . |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Regards, |
| 35 |
Mick |
Archives