NODE 81588034Re: PGP, Inc.
shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)Sat, 11 May 1996 05:49:43 +0800
At 23:10 5/9/96, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote:
> The first level, in other words, is less of a certification than a PGP
>key with self-signature and signature from one other person. It doesn't have
>_any_ effort to verify that the email address stated on it is the actual email
>address of that nym. Or am I misinterpreting you?
I was on a panel with a representative from VeriSign at Interop in Las
Vegas. He said that uniqueness was the only requirement for the first level
of cert. I don't have any information beyond that.
Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer.
-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com>
PGP encrypted mail preferred.
NODE 04922ba3Re: PGP, Inc.
Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>Sat, 11 May 1996 15:25:27 +0800
[Actually talking about VeriSign certs]
On Thu, 9 May 1996, Lucky Green wrote:
> At 23:10 5/9/96, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote:
>
>> The first level, in other words, is less of a certification than a
>>PGP key with self-signature and signature from one other person. It
>>doesn't have _any_ effort to verify that the email address stated on it
>>is the actual email address of that nym. Or am I misinterpreting you?
For the first level, this is correct. I didn't even see an AUP
discouraging spoofing.
> I was on a panel with a representative from VeriSign at Interop in Las
> Vegas. He said that uniqueness was the only requirement for the first level
> of cert. I don't have any information beyond that.
Just visit www.verisign.com with the Netscape 3.x beta and see.
-rich