Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:I use GnuPG (Score 1) 297

by Eythian (#49134123) Attached to: Moxie Marlinspike: GPG Has Run Its Course

No, that's not true. Trite, but still false. Additionally, in your case, it's neither automatic, nor trustworthy.

Thing is, there is a mechanism to make doing it this way trustworthy. By opting out of that mechanism, you put the burden onto everyone else for no reason. The result is that you remove your key from the set able to be considered trustworthy without effort.

Comment: Re:I use GnuPG (Score 1) 297

by Eythian (#49133789) Attached to: Moxie Marlinspike: GPG Has Run Its Course

You can retain a copy of my public key on your compter. Then you can trust any signed message from me to be from the same source as the previous signed message from me.

No, I can't. That's the point. Not without jumping through manual hoops.

"get it to me somehow, and I would have no choice but to accept it"? You allow random strangers to update your hard disk? I don't.

It's not an uncommon configuration to have email clients automatically fetch the keys for signed messages in order to check them. This is generally a sensible configuration, too. However you not using the normal ways of validating trust means that the normal ways don't work in your single case. So trust of your emails can't be verified. Essentially, participating in the web of trust and uploading to keyservers resolves this issue. But because you don't, there is no possible trust path.

There is an argument for trust continuance (i.e. if I trust your key once, why not do it in the future), but your methods make that very annoying to implement, requiring manual checking.

It feels like you either have a misunderstanding of how the WoT is supposed to work that leads you to false conclusions on how best to use it, or you're attempting to subvert it for some reason, however only succeeding in making it too annoying for other people to be bothered working with it.

Comment: Re:I use GnuPG (Score 1) 297

by Eythian (#49133425) Attached to: Moxie Marlinspike: GPG Has Run Its Course

Wrong. You can retain a copy of my public key on your compter. Then you can trust any signed message from me to be from the same source as the previous signed message from me.

Someone could make a key with the same details, get it to me somehow, and I would have no choice but to accept it, or:

  • manually compare the fingerprint (not just the key ID, the whole fingerprint) with that of your previous messages.
  • locally sign it.

These are all things that don't normally have to be done. By eschewing the trust mechanisms, you're reducing the amount of trust I would have that messages to/from you couldn't be compromised.

Comment: Re:People are dumb, and don't care (Score 1) 297

by Eythian (#49132335) Attached to: Moxie Marlinspike: GPG Has Run Its Course

I've only ever bothered for Slackware, for which I believe the ISO images are signed with the official Slackware key.

If you use Ubuntu or Debian, then you are using it every time you do an apt-get update to verify the resulting software lists (which includes the hashes of the software itself.)

Comment: Re:I use GnuPG (Score 1) 297

by Eythian (#49132255) Attached to: Moxie Marlinspike: GPG Has Run Its Course

It is not on any "KeyServer"

Not true:
$ gpg --search "73D9A8A4"
gpg: zoeken naar '73D9A8A4' van de hkps server hkps.pool.sks-keyservers.net
(1) Andy Canfield
            2048 bit RSA key 73D9A8A4, aangemaakt: 2014-08-03

However, it's not associated with your email address, so no mail client can understand it to use it.

Later, you say:

and the public key you get from my web site should confirm the signature.

But I can't trust your site, because it's not HTTPS (which isn't perfect, but is better.) You can get free SSL certs. And I can't trust your key because it's not in the web of trust.

Basically, you have a PGP key, but it's useless for many cases because you haven't done some simple steps to make it useable. I could never trust any signed message to actually be for you, and I can't trust the information I have to encrypt something to you.

Also, yes keyservers can be subverted by the NSA etc. They can also be subverted by me. They're insecure by design, and so that makes them safer.

Comment: Re:Uhm you care because you might want to use GPL (Score 1) 551

by Eythian (#49013905) Attached to: RMS Objects To Support For LLVM's Debugger In GNU Emacs's Gud.el

So someone has given you something to use, for free. And you're saying that it's a problem because you don't want to return the favour? If you're going to be so selfish, then don't use it in the first place. Their condition for you to use it was that you help increase the amount of free software available in the world, and you're refusing to do that, and then blaming them because they want to do good, but you don't want to.

If you're going to do that, you might as well just go buy some proprietary libraries and use them and stay away from this whole free software world entirely, you don't really fit in at all.

Comment: Re:RMS' GNU license is a license that gives away (Score 1) 551

by Eythian (#49013893) Attached to: RMS Objects To Support For LLVM's Debugger In GNU Emacs's Gud.el

Right, but since no one else can relicense your software and make a real project using it, it's only non-GPL'd software that's useful to working people. It's the non-GPL stuff that's more free in real usage.

Sorry, but that's stupid and wrong.

Where I work, we can only use free and open source software, preferably GPL. So by releasing your software as proprietary software, you're making it not useful to people like me who earn money by doing things with software.

Nothing is more admirable than the fortitude with which millionaires tolerate the disadvantages of their wealth. -- Nero Wolfe

Working...