Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #372717

Re: Attn: Marek

Show all headers | View raw

Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 9:22:50 AM UTC-6, Marek Novotny wrote:
>> On 2016-09-25, Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 8:57:37 AM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote:
>> >> On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 8:34:22 AM UTC-6, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:
>> >> > Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote:
>> >> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> >> > > Hash: SHA256
>> >> > > 
>> >> > > On 09/25/2016 07:18 AM, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:
>> >> > >> Best to use an inline signature.
>> >> > > 
>> >> > > How's this?
>> >> > > 
>> >> > > - -- 
>> >> > > Marek Novotny
>> >> > > https://github.com/marek-novotny
>> >> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> >> > > Version: GnuPG v2
>> >> > > 
>> >> > > iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJX597wAAoJEC9nkebvym+hwIwP/A0RzbBWgVrFuOaoaHzz5G5A
>> >> > > MuzPV2r1gDeJJhmAInSRp24cdBKFNgcmt0+yWh0x7wL7IByL9NhAICppCuJWf6AP
>> >> > > 4vFJX3oj9d4MGD9HqXc+GV+/4rn5gPjsedEQVT+dIFgrUTYKypYSFSVsppolMAtP
>> >> > > kiEpcBh8nOLsj+myNy4fH0rGUtLoeqWVLktpYVvdaooTcoUc27f4l0vD0Zsikcg/
>> >> > > AnLqwjenZSBlDb62nRYJOrzb6ro5vQ3zCJRwIUIQGx8qtO5C6lJldIXu9ImA+F/d
>> >> > > IM5Cw2UibuX2iSqwmR4e/13VeJCJg815rb90vkGxqFEFrXUe6ISog3yqRDkiB7iu
>> >> > > pEdK0jL+51UeqOmBB4XpKF74ABD2o9O7/xgFPXW0P8Y/kBjoM6mDXni2/WG//4YQ
>> >> > > glLutlMqLqI5d/9R7XeMTBspral3L9tFc2bS2l6ZZDnmWPnXyKvWmHMIBmfNyRWD
>> >> > > EfK2yjL+VLeepnhFlHuLUZO8EdtRHp7tNX0mDZ1a8NwfHd67gD2taPmSqoFMX1vH
>> >> > > pbyCntHGi5tjRDExS4nxtrnUNztNH4yZKrHzfiSkkTSyXSI8rK5tiFh8xh4IyOh0
>> >> > > /9tvEP1rPHoU5d7IXPlT8nqtNcyBTZkd9c66lQXuaUmn6WcOSeXrdOAmPDSY9PM/
>> >> > > 6pBVZdla7vI9xw6RiBVt
>> >> > > =pDIe
>> >> > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> >> > 
>> >> > Perfect, but I need your public key.
>> >> 
>> >> I just checked his here and it said it verified. How did that happen without me doing anything? Because he reg'd it?
>> >
>> > It does say "Undefined trust", though... but I assume that means I need to go manually 'define' it.
>> >
>> ><http://imgur.com/a/p5np5>
>> >
>> 
>> Oh that's interesting. I guess Google looks it up in the popular key servers where I have verified my GnuPG key already.
>> 
>> On your second question, yes. You need to now say, to yourself, that you
>> give that key whatever trust you put in my saying that is indeed me. And
>> once you do that it separates me from say someone else who claims to be
>> me but can't sign my key or makes a key of a similar name which you have
>> not trusted. 
>> 
>> So once you do this, you always have it. 
>> 
>> It's similar to what I am doing when you told me I was replying to your
>> forged entity. What I did in that case was I put you in my score file
>> with a +1 score. Trolls have a -9999 so I don't see them. But on your
>> posts I see a 1. So I know that the post I am replying to comes from
>> your account which I have established is indeed you. 
>> 
>> So in slrn I only see your posts now. Anyone forging you with a new
>> address for example will not show up with a +1 score. And that tells me
>> to add that *pretender* to the score file with a -9999 and filter them
>> out. 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> 
> One thing that I have never seen spoofed is the Google acct. number so perhaps you can use it as a filtering criteria, too. Here's mine:
> 
> posting-account=qzPusQoAAADVdKNEKE-jqIVbecHp7oZ7 
> 
> My gmail posts go back to 2009 (that I've seen, crackhead's forgeries using gmail only go back to 2012). Notice the posting acct. number on this response matches this post from 2009:
> 
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/C9FwjiytRoA/ftc2GG7-37AJ>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
> 
> iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJX5+9UAAoJELnOYK54exUCqOMP/AiBMj7DVoep+aTZfsYEwg7h
> tTwqKInwpmHwUjkZYu2m+kBBuXOZR47OwKWZpUCfnloN4pfL2cgTqmAHeDilVI+L
> 9sUw15rPd95n/5BDXezZnxzoL6n/8/GzHYmFqUJoKScaOxab4Odf97PDqVfEqiml
> G86egbR85z7deWiUNcl8Bq1zLtP17eSGy0sUmPMMDrbw/7lbGQ4ayA/ZqjfzXadx
> qmf3+WYUEvquDgXN4b6x9Ig+EzlIME0Ylp3I6COEFJ69Ozu3ZjwWDp1RWI0Eq4XP
> vV2I1GFq19AO02hAvJ/qZcWAHgYwhhlFmVWzoqbA1dSnDsCjLr0+xGaAUVcLuwjd
> qNdLSd1wrunCfUuotc6kUGyvj2Vy3zA5oWmLpHA4utjOrm5RlSyTaJHESOV08CAS
> X0YO+7LjGBxZ87U//Jfo0vB5u+ij91l7Zdsphf+eSNWvJ+DoUtimlvcP5o4Te1D9
> rKNmZ1QUMkl/Kjl9x70Q58XH8etkp9d2NHE1vVth5c9vsfAaNkJVHn7TIC79h4NE
> Kny8Zp0r+QCsKnqs+NYd9GPyhvGsGmoBzEneAOgs7l509EoCOB3+Lfam3D7OmdvD
> 97FL/nbKbmDE8n9H8gs1sAua3Yfwz8S7IpHN19GTh9GNCKU8F+orXTSzAPUaKNyp
> mMihyxG5fd2CFFGEQV8a
> =sC4v
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 
>> I think the score file is easier, but apps like Thunderbird don't have a
>> good scoring system. If everyone used slrn this would be easy. On the
>> other hand I'm not quite there yet on configuring slrn with GnuPG. So
>> for now if I want to send a signed post I am using Thunderbird. I'll
>> have to play around with slrn some more. And for now I am doing that on
>> my local machine. I'll have to move that to my ssh server so I can
>> remote like I like doing if I am going to use slrn in that way. But I'm
>> not sure I find too much value in it as I'd guess most users aren't
>> setup for verification anyway. It would be good if everyone was, but
>> they're not. Scoring seems to be a more realistic method and many don't
>> even use that effectively. 
>> 
>> Maybe once I get everything setup and I practice is and understand it
>> all very well I might make a YouTube video about slrn and thunderbird,
>> uses of scoring in slrn for both approving and removing wanted and
>> unwanted posts in usenet. 
> 
> 
Do you have a new key now?
anon@lowtide:~$ gpg --verify steve.signed
gpg: Signature made Sun 25 Sep 2016 11:37:56 AM EDT using RSA key ID 787B1502
gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found
anon@lowtide:~$ 

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Attn: Marek "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-25 14:18 +0000
  Re: Attn: Marek Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 07:28 -0700
    Re: Attn: Marek "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-25 14:34 +0000
      Re: Attn: Marek Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 07:45 -0700
      Re: Attn: Marek Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 07:57 -0700
        Re: Attn: Marek Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 08:02 -0700
          Re: Attn: Marek Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 15:22 +0000
            Re: Attn: Marek Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 08:38 -0700
              Re: Attn: Marek "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-25 15:58 +0000
                Re: Attn: Marek Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 09:02 -0700
                Re: Attn: Marek Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 09:05 -0700
                Re: Attn: Marek "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-25 16:24 +0000
            Re: Attn: Marek "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-25 15:56 +0000
              Re: Attn: Marek Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 16:10 +0000
            Re: Attn: Marek GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-25 12:28 -0600

csiph-web