Re: Don't use PGP/GPG signatures in mail that contains patches

From	Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: Don't use PGP/GPG signatures in mail that contains patches
Date	2016-01-19 22:20 +0100
Message-ID	<qSLR0-4Xv-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<qSq0a-6yA-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <qSq0a-6yA-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <qSD73-7hM-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

Andrey Utkin <andrey.od.utkin@gmail.com> wrote:
> But still, if we encourage signing maillist correspondence, we would
> avoid impersonation attacks. Imagine that somebody sends stupid
> submissions from your name, maintainers shout at you, and your
> reputataion is... changed. Of course, you will be able to sort things
> out after you read the replies and reply that it's not you. But, given
> to openness of maillists, the attacker is able to follow your replies
> and insert his ones. Or to reply to your valid submissions that they are
> not from you.

Is impersonation an actual problem on vger.kernel.org lists?
Reply-to-all conventions on these lists do a great deal to discourage them.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Don't use PGP/GPG signatures in mail that contains patches Jeff King <peff@peff.net> - 2016-01-18 23:00 +0100
  Re: Don't use PGP/GPG signatures in mail that contains patches Andrey Utkin <andrey.od.utkin@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 13:00 +0100
    Re: Don't use PGP/GPG signatures in mail that contains patches Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> - 2016-01-19 22:20 +0100

csiph-web