[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Sks-devel] terminating

From: Ryan
Subject: Re: [Sks-devel] terminating
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 11:56:56 -0600

I think a local blacklist is the way to go. 

Re-reading peter's termination notice it sounds like nothing has gone through 
his local legal system, the user is just threatening to and peter does not wish 
to go to court. 

Weather or not its in the database, if the user causing these issues cant 
retrieve that info from Peter's server I would think that would satisfy him 
enough to prevent a legal injunction against Peter and his key server.

So far the courts have not told anyone to permanently remove a key from any of 
our key-servers, and while a blacklist to prevent serving that key may not 
satisfy such a court order, I have a feeling it would satisfy anyone 
threatening legal action. Its obvious they don't understand how sks works, so I 
doubt anyone will question if the key is still on the network or not if the 
node they have been harassing refuses to serve it. 

A local blacklist would not interfere with trust, the key would still be on the 
network and would remain unmodified.. it would just be the discretion of the 
local key-server operator if the key can be served via hkp. 

Distributing these blacklists/key-deletes beyond the local server introduces a 
bunch of issues I don't think were going to get a solid agreement on. That idea 
just seems like a bad can of worms.

I do fear once its technically possible to blacklist a key were going to see 
alot of baseless threats just because is been proven to work. This is where we 
all need to take a firm stance and not actually give in to these requests until 
there is serious threat of litigation or an actual injunction served.


On Sep 8, 2010, at 10:53 AM, Jack Cummings wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 03:04:35PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> 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.
>> Given the ability for arbitrary people to attach arbitrary pictures to
>> arbitrary keys, I think the ability to remove packets from the database
>> is a feature that keyservers are going to have to grow.
> A simple solution to this problem is to maintain a list of keyids to never
> serve[0]. As a server operator, everytime I get a notorized takedown notice,
> than I'll add a key to that list. 
> --Jack 
> --
> Jack (John) Cummings                 
> PGP fingerprint: F18B 13A3 6D06 D48A 598D  42EA 3D53 BDC8 7917 F802
> _______________________________________________
> Sks-devel mailing list
> address@hidden

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

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