If you do not need to pgp/gpg sign email message to the lists please don't. I know I probably don't have your pgp public key and a lot more users probably do not either. Please use your best judgment. Thank you and best regards. -- J. Hellenthal jhellenthal@gmail.com
On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 11:40 -0400, J. Hellenthal wrote:> If you do not need to pgp/gpg sign email message to the lists please don't. I > know I probably don't have your pgp public key and a lot more users probably do > not either. Please use your best judgment.http://www.freebsd.org/doc/pgpkeyring.txt Frankly, I always sign messages, except that evolution / gpg support is currently a bit broken... robert.> Thank you and best regards.-- Robert Noland <rnoland@FreeBSD.org> FreeBSD
In response to "J. Hellenthal" <jhellenthal@gmail.com>:> > If you do not need to pgp/gpg sign email message to the lists please don't.What is the purpose of your message? The above statement is self-cancelling. If I go to the trouble to establish a pgp/gpg key, I will sign every single message that I send out. The purpose of this is to differentiate actual messages from me from messages that may impersonate me.> I > know I probably don't have your pgp public key and a lot more users probably do > not either. Please use your best judgment.While you're free to voice your opinion, I don't understand your purpose in spamming three mailing lists with this demand. What problem are you trying to solve? -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/
At the risk of sounding offtopic and political, as participants in IT and the open source community at large, aren't we supposed to hold ourselves to the "higher standard" and promote the use of encrypted email? If we're refusing to read signed messages because we have client-side problems with signatures (and are too lazy to fix them), how do we expect (or wish for) the rest of the world to do so? On 2009-09-23 11:09:32AM -0500, Robert Noland wrote:> On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 11:40 -0400, J. Hellenthal wrote: > > If you do not need to pgp/gpg sign email message to the lists please don't. I > > know I probably don't have your pgp public key and a lot more users probably do > > not either. Please use your best judgment. > > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/pgpkeyring.txt > > Frankly, I always sign messages, except that evolution / gpg support is > currently a bit broken... > > robert. > > > Thank you and best regards. > > -- > Robert Noland <rnoland@FreeBSD.org> > FreeBSD > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"-- ==========================================================Peter C. Lai | Bard College at Simon's Rock Systems Administrator | 84 Alford Rd. Information Technology Svcs. | Gt. Barrington, MA 01230 USA peter AT simons-rock.edu | (413) 528-7428 ===========================================================
On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 11:40 -0400, J. Hellenthal wrote:> If you do not need to pgp/gpg sign email message to the lists please don't. I > know I probably don't have your pgp public key and a lot more users probably do > not either. Please use your best judgment. > > Thank you and best regards.BTW, it also helps to mitigate messages like this one... robert.
On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 11:40 -0000, jhellenthal wrote:> > If you do not need to pgp/gpg sign email message to the lists please don't. I > know I probably don't have your pgp public key and a lot more users probably > do not either. Please use your best judgment. > > Thank you and best regards. > >Alright If I must. Let me explain this email for the uncommon circumstances and big heads on the subject line. This was just a request not an authoritative (must do) and certainly not spam as some have had a concern over. If I do not have your public key in my keyring then I do not want it, do not need it and have no use for it at this time. This keeps my keyring small and manageable. I do not feel the need to explain my process or setup on this matter as this email was intended as just a request as I don't see the need to sign a message to a mailing list when the information that is contained in more than half of the incoming email is not important enough to be signed. For an example of the emails I am referring to (ports@): "I am having problems with such/and/such/port/" Why should it be signed ? I understand, shit happens.... but I don't need to verify that it happened to Random Joe. Now on the other hand I firmly believe that a patch that is submitted by a maintainer or someone @FreeBSD.org should be signed. I am not referring to these emails at all in the last message and I apologize if that was unrecognizable to you. There is a purpose for signing messages that contain information that someone needs to verify is actually from a trusted source but not all information that is transmitted needs to be verified. And that is all I was referring to when saying use your best judgment. I will not be posting back on this subject as I never intended for this to be a off topic matter (just a request). Best regards -- J. Hellenthal (0x87337C16) gmail.com!jhellenthal :wq