Re: quasi-deniable signing
"Hal Finney" <hal@finney.org> Sun, 14 April 2002 04:55 UTC
Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA05634 for <openpgp-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Apr 2002 00:55:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) id g3E4bwK16725 for ietf-openpgp-bks; Sat, 13 Apr 2002 21:37:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from finney.org (226-132.adsl2.netlojix.net [207.71.226.132]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g3E4bvm16721 for <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>; Sat, 13 Apr 2002 21:37:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from hal@localhost) by finney.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g3E4SrZ17559; Sat, 13 Apr 2002 21:28:53 -0700
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 21:28:53 -0700
From: Hal Finney <hal@finney.org>
Message-Id: <200204140428.g3E4SrZ17559@finney.org>
To: ietf-openpgp@imc.org, jkane89@softhome.net
Subject: Re: quasi-deniable signing
Sender: owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openpgp/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openpgp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-openpgp.imc.org>
John Kane writes: > Call me silly, but I don't think the OpenPGP protocol really > needs either of these modes as part of the standard. Why is that? What do you think of the argument that in most cases (aside from public postings), this is the kind of signature that you would actually prefer? It lets your recipient verify that you sent it, but keeps you from being possibly hurt by having your signed message shown to someone else. Hal Finney
- quasi-deniable signing John Kane
- Re: quasi-deniable signing Hal Finney