Hey Peter, and list!
Peter Lebbing schreef op 2017-02-20 17:58:
On 19/02/17 21:16, Nils Vogels wrote:
I'll read up on this thread from the archives, but I'm exploring
possibilities
to enhance the FOSDEM format with the use of QR for on-the-spot
signing for
those who want to and don't mind
On 19/02/17 21:16, Nils Vogels wrote:
> I'll read up on this thread from the archives, but I'm exploring possibilities
> to enhance the FOSDEM format with the use of QR for on-the-spot signing for
> those who want to and don't mind having signatures submitted by signers to
> keyservers.
Thank you
Hey Peter,
I've submitted a keysigning party at sha2017 earlier, so we should have a slot
to try something out.
I'll read up on this thread from the archives, but I'm exploring possibilities
to enhance the FOSDEM format with the use of QR for on-the-spot signing for
those who want to and
Le 2017-02-19 à 01:45, Peter Lebbing a écrit :
> It failed on a trivial point: by the Friday before the congress, I had only
> received four signups. A list with five keys is a poor list indeed. I switched
> the model to the classic "bring keyslips" model.
Ah, fair enough. That's a bit
On 18/02/17 16:15, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> O Come, All Ye Hackful! Adeste Fiddle-es[2]!
Yea !
Philip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
Hello Lachlan,
On 15/02/17 14:32, Lachlan Gunn wrote:
> Given the discussion on the list before, now that CCC has come and gone
> I'm curious as to how well this worked.
It failed on a trivial point: by the Friday before the congress, I had only
received four signups. A list with five keys is a
Hello,
Le 2016-12-05 à 00:03, Peter Lebbing a écrit :
> I am asking for your thoughts on a variant of the organization of the
> keysigning party. I'll explain my reasoning and intentions, and I would
> like to know if you think I forgot to think of something important. Is
> there a way a
Le 2016-12-14 à 04:34, Peter Lebbing a écrit :
> Oh, not at all, I hadn't even noticed one could see it that way.
My bad; such is the life of the email-user.
> Or hang a truly huge printout on the wall and at the start of the
> session, together observe that it is correct. Any latecomers can be
On 12/12/16 06:27, Lachlan Gunn wrote:
> My apologies if I came across as overly harsh.
Oh, not at all, I hadn't even noticed one could see it that way.
. What I meant was that it
> took me a little bit of time to work out exactly what you meant, so
> someone unfamilar with the web of trust will
On 12/12/16 07:02, Lachlan Gunn wrote:
> Also, while I promised to forever hold my peace, you might want to give
> people a a programmatic way to make the scrubbed list so that those who
> print their own don't need to manually verify it.
If they want to have a known good copy, they can just
Le 2016-12-12 à 03:45, Peter Lebbing a écrit :
> My e-mail was 1424 words though, so I am afraid I ended up in your
> wishful thinking area.
>
> The remaining 1607 words are in the sections "Background" and "Option
> for advanced users", and those words happen to include the name Lachlan.
> Go
Le 2016-12-12 à 03:45, Peter Lebbing a écrit :
> I really like this suggestion! I had to think about it for a while
> before I could see a way to make it work. The trouble is that I want
> caff to be able to process the file, and for that I need to keep it
> having much of the same patterns. I
Le 2016-12-08 à 22:30, Stephan Beck a écrit :
> Yes, to your first question. How you would do that via the
> hash-on-the-projector method, is not clear to me, though. Would that be
> for generating the (initial) list of the organizers as in Sassaman
> Efficient (as an additional service for people
On 11/12/16 21:37, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> Peter's correction was made in a spirit of utterly pedantic attention
> to detail [a spirit I share!]
Hah! Guilty as charged :-).
Peter.
--
I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail.
You can send me encrypted mail if you want
> Or you might not because it was based on a stupid thinking error on my
> side. Let's make it "a chance of 1 in 2^128", which could be the chance
> of you trying a symmetric encryption key and actually being right about it.
I'm glad you made the correction: that error was so profound. :)
On 11/12/16 18:22, Peter Lebbing wrote:
> You might recognise the chosen quantity :-).
Or you might not because it was based on a stupid thinking error on my
side. Let's make it "a chance of 1 in 2^128", which could be the chance
of you trying a symmetric encryption key and actually being right
On 08/12/16 15:08, Lachlan Gunn wrote:
> Can't they get this from the other participants in the line? Checking
> with a few people at random gives reasonable assurance that this is what
> was agreed on at the beginning, or they can check them all if they want
> to be certain.
Personally, I find
On 08/12/16 14:51, Lachlan Gunn wrote:
> Personally I am of the mind that anything longer than that email is
> wishful thinking, you have to get people to actually follow it.
The e-mail wasn't meant to be the text for participants. I've spent all
afternoon writing a text at the 33C3 wiki[1], but
Peter Lebbing:
> On 08/12/16 14:14, Stephan Beck wrote:
>> Just some meditations:
>>
>> So, the late attendees can see and hear that the ordinary participants
>> confirm the checksum and that their fingerprints check out?
>
> Yes, the late attendees definitely need to be there at the beginning
Le 2016-12-09 à 00:25, Peter Lebbing a écrit :
> Yes, the late attendees definitely need to be there at the beginning of the
> party, verifying that the SHA256 checksum printed at the top of their scrubbed
> list is the one being read aloud and hearing everybody confirm their
> fingerprint
> is
Le 2016-12-08 à 22:05, Peter Lebbing a écrit :
> Stephan and Lachlan, thank you for thinking about this! I need to make a
> decision soon, I really need feedback!
Not a problem, efficient keysigning is something I've been pondering for
a while, so I'm really glad to see people working in the
On 08/12/16 14:14, Stephan Beck wrote:
> Just some meditations:
>
> So, the late attendees can see and hear that the ordinary participants
> confirm the checksum and that their fingerprints check out?
Yes, the late attendees definitely need to be there at the beginning of the
party, verifying
Peter Lebbing:
> Stephan and Lachlan, thank you for thinking about this! I need to make a
> decision soon, I really need feedback!
>
> On 07/12/16 22:44, Stephan Beck wrote:
>> Doesn't your proposal imply that late attendees could
>> make their way through all the keysigning without fingerprint
Hi,
Lachlan Gunn:
> Le 2016-12-08 à 08:14, Stephan Beck a écrit :
>> Doesn't your proposal imply that late attendees could
>> make their way through all the keysigning without fingerprint
>> verification? Or do I miss something?
>
> If I understand correctly, the late attendees still get a copy
Stephan and Lachlan, thank you for thinking about this! I need to make a
decision soon, I really need feedback!
On 07/12/16 22:44, Stephan Beck wrote:
> Doesn't your proposal imply that late attendees could
> make their way through all the keysigning without fingerprint
> verification? Or do I
On 08/12/16 07:29, Lachlan Gunn wrote:
> If I understand correctly, the late attendees still get a copy of the
> fingerprints after the fact, they just don't have it on their sheet of
> paper. The fingerprint-less piece of paper just lets them keep a record
> of who they have verified, and gives
Le 2016-12-08 à 08:14, Stephan Beck a écrit :
> Doesn't your proposal imply that late attendees could
> make their way through all the keysigning without fingerprint
> verification? Or do I miss something?
If I understand correctly, the late attendees still get a copy of the
fingerprints after
Peter Lebbing:
> Hi all,
>
> In just a few weeks, the 33C3 will be held in Hamburg, the 33th Chaos
> Communication Congress organized by the Chaos Computer Club. I intend to
> organize a keysigning party, just because they are fun.
>
> I am asking for your thoughts on a variant of the
Hi all,
In just a few weeks, the 33C3 will be held in Hamburg, the 33th Chaos
Communication Congress organized by the Chaos Computer Club. I intend to
organize a keysigning party, just because they are fun.
I am asking for your thoughts on a variant of the organization of the
keysigning party.
29 matches
Mail list logo
