Re: Proposal for new Attribute packet

["William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@xxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In <Pine.LNX.3.96.980319202340.193C-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, on 03/19/98

   at 08:25 PM, christopher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Christopher Creutzig) said:


>On Tue, 10 Mar 1998, Jack Repenning wrote:

>-> to") the key owner doing so.  The end goal is (I think) the ability to
>-> express the meaning of your signature ... "I certify this key for
>business -> purposes, but I wouldn't trust this blighter with the
>personal secrets of a -> snail."  

> I think the comment packet would be OK for this, it would just need to
>be allowed in signatures in general, not just self-signatures. IMHO that
>would be a good thing[tm]. Of course, user interfaces would need to
>clearly state that this is *not* a comment the key owner set.

No, I don't like it I don't like it at all. All a signature on a UserID is
to represent is authentication of ownership. I do *not* want my keys
cluttered up with a bunch of meaningless comments from 3rd parties.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/esecure.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
 
Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Bill Gates' worst nightmare!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a-sha1
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBNRGM449Co1n+aLhhAQFe0AQAy7+aC6ABYbGz9wCwjII9PBLWcA6sVm/A
Rwq3q6NiKPOBug6NSHXDW8SX8nFuF5EnCvV7yq2lYfgf6PeqSjqztRq2KmCu7mRc
hICStPx3TCMJdWETJbn5vdxCZFAVodntscSoMIU17X3OoQRa81yraOQI72S4kKEE
bZ4binb9AjM=
=Dptr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----