On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 09:22:30PM +0200, Peter Pramberger wrote: > It's pretty clear in this direction: the data has to be *deleted*. Which, in > this case, affects the local database.
In that case, I would delete the minimum information possible...
On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 12:02:43AM +0200, Peter Pramberger wrote:
> Maybe we should be more precise here: a bunch of numbers by itself does not
> make private data, tagging it with names and email addresses does.
>
> ...some random MPI's *with his/her/whatever name linked to them*...
I would keep all the key material, revocations, and (yes, even the)
signatures certifying the user and photo IDs while deleting all the
userid and photo ID packets, effectively anonymizing the key as
henceforth stored on the server.
--
Jason Harris | NIC: JH329, PGP: This _is_ PGP-signed, isn't it?
jhar...@widomaker.com _|_
Got photons? (TM), (C) 2004
pgpkmtibjFxCZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Sks-devel mailing list Sks-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/sks-devel
