On 3 October 2014 02:08, Tao Effect <[email protected]> wrote: > On Oct 2, 2014, at 3:25 AM, Ben Laurie <[email protected]> wrote: > > "Keys will be non-repudiable and thus it will clear after an adverse > event who facilitated the MITM attack." > > > I still don't understand how this is true. All that "we" see is that a > key changed, which is a completely normal event and will be happening at > a rate which is probably difficult for "us" to even keep up with. All > "we" really have is the word of the user that something in the log is > inappropriate. I don't see any other real definitive "proof." > So what's the difference between CT and "the simple thing?" In both > cases, all we have is the word of the user that something they claim to > be amiss is amiss. > > > The difference is that with CT the user whose key changes necessarily > becomes aware that it has changed. In "the simple thing?" only the > targeted user of the key is aware of this change. > > > How is the owner of the key informed about the key change? >
Software holding the key monitors the log(s) for key changes.
_______________________________________________ Messaging mailing list [email protected] https://moderncrypto.org/mailman/listinfo/messaging
