why bother signing? (was Re: What email encryption is actually in use?)
Major Variola (ret)
mv at cdc.gov
Fri Oct 4 13:07:50 PDT 2002
At 04:45 PM 10/3/02 -0700, James A. Donald wrote:
>James A. Donald wrote:
>> > If we had client side encryption that "just works" we would
>> > be seeing a few more signed messages on this list,
>Ben Laurie wrote:
>> Why would I want to sign a message to this list?
>Then all the people who read this list, were they to receive a
>communication from you, they would know it was the same Ben
>Laurie who posts to this list.
But Ben is not spoofed here! So there is little motivation.
In an environment where spoofing was common, folks would
sign (which is not incompatible with retaining anonymity, of course).
You could also sign anonymous statements here which you might
decide to bind to one of your identities later.
In the absence of any need, its not rational to bother.
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy