Well... IMHO you did all what you had to/could do, if you want to keep confidentiality : claiming your public key in association with your name on several websites. Now, just hope no covert agency will try to impersonate you until a lot of people verify and sign your public key.
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 11:38:23PM +0000, adrelanos wrote: > Yes, I agree, it's pretty much impossible to distinguish myself from a > nation-state's covert agency. Hence, I only asked how to claim a pseudonym. > > David Chadwick: > > Its pretty much impossible to distinguish a nation-state's covert agency > > personnel who are masquerading as someone else from the real someone > > else. In the UK we have recently had examples of undercover agents > > infiltrating animal rights groups or similar as activists, forming deep > > emotional relationships with female members, moving in with them, having > > children with them, and then years later, after the group has been > > smashed, disappearing from the scene. One such lady victim saw the > > picture of a policeman years later (I think in a newspaper) and > > recognised him as the father of her child, which is when the scam was > > blown open. So in short, these agencies do not find it difficult to do > > anything that they need or want to do > > > > regards > > > > David > > > > On 26/03/2013 17:36, Johnicholas Hines wrote: > >> The question is how to distinguish yourself from a nation-state's covert > >> agency purporting to be an individual interested in anonymity; you need > >> to do something that the agency would find difficult to do. > >> > >> Getting your name and key into difficult-to-corrupt archives will start > >> a timer - eventually you can point to the archives as evidence that you > >> are not a newcomer. Even an agency would find it difficult to change > >> history. > >> > >> Spending money or effort forces a covert agency to also spend money or > >> effort to replicate your behavior. For example, if you sent someone a > >> bitcoin, they would have to spend some dollars to establish themselves > >> as comparably credible. Unfortunately, they have deep pockets. Effort > >> might be preferable to money, since leaves more ways that a covert > >> agency might make a mistake, behaving in some characteristic way (e.g. > >> some sort of automatic authorship attribution software might become > >> available that revealed them to be a team rather than an individual). > >> Steady effort at releasing patches over a decade might be moderately > >> credible. > >> > >> Johnicholas > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Gnupg-users mailing list > >> Gnupg-users@gnupg.org > >> http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gnupg-users mailing list > Gnupg-users@gnupg.org > http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users