On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 11:07:50PM -0500, Jason Harris wrote: > I really don't think it is worth trying to protect against these > scenarios. A user can simply remove any non-revocable sigs they > don't want in their local keyring.
As soon as you posit a user who is going to edit their local keyring, there is nothing to discuss. Editing the keyring violates the trust "contract". I don't think there is anything left to discuss. We've about reached the stage where I'm saying "10+2!" and you're saying, "Bad example! It's 6+6!" > > When importing a non-revoke-sig + revoked sig set, PGP doesn't strip > > anything, but does ignore the non-revokable sig (it isn't even visible > > in the GUI). > > Gah! PGP 8.1 allows non-revocable sigs to be revoked?! No. So far as I can tell in a not particularly rigorous 5-minute test, it ignores the non-revocable sig completely. It's as if the uid is unsigned. This is a safe way to ignore such a signature. No idea what PGP 9 does. I haven't played with it yet. PGP 7, incidentally, did allow non-revocable sigs to be revoked. Nice to see that was fixed. David _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users