On Tue, 31 May 2005 14:13:54 -0600 "Wesley J. Landaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 31 May 2005 14:11, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 09:03:12AM -0600, Wesley J. Landaker wrote: > > > I wrote this up to someone. I thought I'd share it, and get your > > > thoughts. (e.g. anybody see any weaknesses in #1-#3 that *aren't* > > > present in the typical meet, check ID, get GPG fingerprint, > > > assuming #4 is always used afterwards?) > > > > Falsifying a government-issued ID is a criminal offence, regardless > > of how often it happens (using it to buy alcohol is not important; > > they simply raise the minimum age to compensate, so there's no need > > to enforce it there). Falsifying a random photograph is not illegal > > at all, and there is no reason why somebody wouldn't do it. Nothing > > here has verified their identity with any strength to speak of. A > > person who wants to generate an identity can do so with minimal > > effort and no repercussions - so why wouldn't they? > > Right, but they have to get it notarized (or forge a notary's seal, > which is a criminal offense, at least in the US) which requires > government ID (again, at least in the US). > > Regardless, how is this different from meeting someone in person? They > can just show me their fake ID--I won't know it's fake. (And, as you > said, forged ID happens a lot and is easily available. =) So why bother with steps 1 & 2 when 3 is the only one that carries any weight? Maybe there is a good reason that I do not know of, but I can not think of any. I am genuinely curious, though. Just my $0.02. Jacob -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
