From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754089Ab1JHVQd (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Oct 2011 17:16:33 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:37447 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754053Ab1JHVQc (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Oct 2011 17:16:32 -0400 Message-ID: <4E90BC10.5020300@zytor.com> Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2011 14:09:36 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110927 Thunderbird/7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jon Masters CC: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Krzysztof Halasa , Adrian Bunk , "Frank Ch. Eigler" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Greg KH Subject: Re: kernel.org status: establishing a PGP web of trust References: <4E8655CD.90107@zytor.com> <201110020304.28288.rjw@sisk.pl> <4E87B885.50005@zytor.com> <201110021354.57995.rjw@sisk.pl> <4E88A537.4010008@zytor.com> <20111003093239.GB25136@localhost.pp.htv.fi> <20111003180441.GD3072@localhost.pp.htv.fi> <34045.1317760188@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <1317916702.19519.1.camel@constitution.bos.jonmasters.org> <14191.1317930659@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <15324.1318004954@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <1318050133.19519.184.camel@constitution.bos.jonmasters.org> <58779.1318084612@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <1318096788.19519.187.camel@constitution.bos.jonmasters.org> In-Reply-To: <1318096788.19519.187.camel@constitution.bos.jonmasters.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/08/2011 10:59 AM, Jon Masters wrote: > > Good point about being pedantic, and the rest of your comments :) I > understand that I'm taking this a little far but I'm just trying to > point out one particular gaping hole in the way these things are > currently done. One reason I stopped doing keysigning parties is that I > realized they were mostly a show. You turn up and get a key signed and > then everyone is impressed that you're in the strong set...wupdedoo. Not > that I've anything against signing stuff on kernel.org and trying to > improve things (I've long directly signed everything on master with my > own keys in slight violation of policy, but that turned out to right). > Not so much in violation of policy... we just couldn't get people to do it. -hpa