On Sat, 3 Dec 1994, Eric Hughes wrote:
From: Christian Odhner <cdodhner@PrimeNet.Com>
I trust a key to be an introducer if and when I am sure that a signature by that key means that the signed key belongs to the identity (be it "real" or a 'nym) it claims to represent.
There is a qualitative difference between a real identity and a pseudonym identity. A real identity has a body attached to it and a pseudonym identity does not. The phrase "belongs to" cannot be used in the same sense for both of these, and the failure to discriminate between them is a fallacy.
I understand the difference and was not attempting to equate the two, just save a few words.. :)
As far as an MIT autosigner, the signature will simply represent a reduction to the trustability of the MIT account assignment procedure. This is not a reduction to bodily identity and should not be construed as such.
That's the point I was trying to make, only you said it a little better.
Derek.) The signature here represents an attestation that a given key (that is, a given identity) can be reached through a particular mailbox.
*THAT* is the usefullness that I hadn't realized. Thanks for pointing it out. Happy Hunting, -Chris. ______________________________________________________________________________ Christian Douglas Odhner | "The NSA can have my secret key when they pry cdodhner@primenet.com | it from my cold, dead, hands... But they shall pgp 2.3 public key by finger | NEVER have the password it's encrypted with!" cypherpunks WOw dCD Traskcom Team Stupid Key fingerprint = 58 62 A2 84 FD 4F 56 38 82 69 6F 08 E4 F1 79 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------