-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Hi
On Saturday 7 May 2011 at 12:11:06 AM, in <mid:BANLkTimNq9nxpf23=pe2n0rr1stnh3a...@mail.gmail.com>, Jerome Baum wrote: > Actually let me put this in context so you see what I > mean. I already see what you mean; I just happen to disagree. (-; > Say my sub-key expired yesterday. Today, you come > up to me and ask me to sign something (say, a statement > that I agree to specific contractual terms). Whoever is > in possession of my sub-key cannot sign that document > as at the time that the statement was made available to > me for signing, the sub-key was already invalid. The timestamp of the signature proves nothing. It is merely the time on the system clock when the signature was made. The system clock may be correct or incorrect; in your scenario above, it looks like you set it deliberately a day behind in an attempt to generate plausible deniability for your signature. - -- Best regards MFPA mailto:expires2...@ymail.com Ultimate consistency lies in being consistently inconsistent -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQE7BAEBCgClBQJNxIe8nhSAAAAAAEAAVXNpZ25pbmdfa2V5X0lEIHNpZ25pbmdf a2V5X0ZpbmdlcnByaW50IEAgIE1hc3Rlcl9rZXlfRmluZ2VycHJpbnQgQThBOTBC OEVBRDBDNkU2OSBCQTIzOUI0NjgxRjFFRjk1MThFNkJENDY0NDdFQ0EwMyBAIEJB MjM5QjQ2ODFGMUVGOTUxOEU2QkQ0NjQ0N0VDQTAzAAoJEKipC46tDG5pkBMEAKrg GwnIdzVfOnq/hx5Jn/fJ4qoky8jpQQke58wKSuioX68DgZfAbpf9o01PHowfzMHT bS7JAbSJEV1R874A7lGVRaVnWekD7J9aCgVFp/EiN+ehUGK91357HO6d6fH9eNKS RQvRiFNr/1x1tPGHEXHox26Vs2PJaEjs3wRBJMvJ =sv0T -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
