[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Sks-devel] terminating

From: Johan van Selst
Subject: Re: [Sks-devel] terminating
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 22:40:40 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-14)

Peter Pramberger wrote:
> Johan van Selst schrieb am 07.09.2010 21:11:
> > It may be useful to have a permanent local blacklist for individual
> > servers
> This is exactly what was intentionally NOT designed in - to prevent
> any form of censorship and data manipulation.

That makes perfect sense. But still, there is nothing preventing this
user (or anyone else) from harassing other keyserver maintainers and
demanding key removal everywhere. It would be a real shame if all
keyservers in the western world had to shut down for legal reasons.

> How do you ensure that the blocking request comes from an authorized
> person?

This is an everyday legal issue that ISPs and local authorities deal
with as a matter of routine. I believe the local implementation is to
sent a copy of ID along with confirmation of the identity from a legal
notary by registered post.

> And what comes afterwards? Every public key with a lost passphrase,
> private key would end on this blacklist.

There is no reason to go beyond the minimum legal requirements.

> And not to forget: to prevent segmentation of the keyserver network,
> you'd have to synchronize the filter list across all keyservers.

Personally, I'd be willing to accept that segmentation. Even though
I really do not like the idea a segmented PGP key database, the
alternative seems even worse...


Attachment: pgpojpJ8e4QFr.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]