Re: key for Alice as promised (not)

>Can you imagine??  I'm simply not willing to fool myself into thinking 
>that I ahve security by posting a key and using PGP.

Unless you can post some proof that PGP is insecure, stop insisting it is.

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6

mQBtAzCNppQAAAEDALhWZl7IuGZ9zZT5bACo0b/1L0Nv0C72vKHIO3IHh+cwpHHa
2Ozb9aeO0UvXGwkkZIYgUm0EvmzKh7yb1GTLvBp5kXpR3I9w+Yj4LGlBDERpUWw6
x4ED49pwDnz1Hl5FBQAFEbQYYXNoIDxhaHVwcEBwcmltZW5ldC5jb20+
=PtJK
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

On Tue, 28 Nov 1995, Adam Hupp wrote:

> >Can you imagine??  I'm simply not willing to fool myself into thinking 
> >that I ahve security by posting a key and using PGP.
> 
> Unless you can post some proof that PGP is insecure, stop insisting it is.

Hold on a minute.  Alice is, here, 100% correct.

If I use PGP to read messages and there's a videocamera trained on the 
keyboard, and other people have access to the machine, PGP is not 
secure.  Similarly, if PGP is on a computer which other people may use 
without my supervision, they can  monitor keystrokes, etc. and PGP is not 
secure.

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link; Alice recognizes this, and 
makes no claim that PGP itself is the weak link.  The weak link is the 
physical security of the system which Alice claims to use.

Jon
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lasser                <jlasser@rwd.goucher.edu>            (410)494-3072 
          Visit my home page at http://www.goucher.edu/~jlasser/
  You have a friend at the NSA: Big Brother is watching. Finger for PGP key.