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

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #372715

Re: Attn: Marek

Show all headers | View raw

Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> 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. 
> 
> 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. 
> 

Your other message verifies btw.  I don't have anything set up in
tin to handle gpg, which is why it is such a pain in the ass with
gpg attachments.  I do all gpg stuff with the gpg cli.  I save
the message and gpg --verify it, etc.  I'll manually wrap a response
with a sig offline, etc.  (ascii armor everything and no attachments).

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