Re: authenticated email

--On tirsdag, juni 03, 2003 09:20:24 -0700 Michael Thomas <mat(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> 
wrote:
> I, like you, suspect that authenticated email may
> be helpful in the spam wars, but this must not be
> viewed in isolation. "Authentication" begs the
> question of identity, trust in assertion,
> ownership of identity, and the motivation and
> foibles of third parties who would likely be
> needed to scale this to anything that would be
> useful.
>
> In particular, the latter is almost without
> exception a "be careful for what you wish for"
> situation. Centralization of power for naming and
> thus participation would be a very convenient tool
> to exclude undesirables. Today that's spammers,
> but where are the checks and balances? What
> prevents less worthy causes? How do you prevent an
> unreasonable accrual of power made real by virtue
> of being the path of least resistance for the
> great unwashed masses?
>
> Unless these issues -- and many more -- can be
> finessed, the cure might be worse than the
> disease.
I thought I'd try this....

is there any particular disadvantage or centralization of power implied in 
me signing this message with my PGP key?
If not, is there any particular reason that I shouldn't do this all the 
time?
It's not a solution, but is there a downside?

                 Harald Alvestrand, wondering.....

pgpFhcNcO9Mhp.pgp
Description: PGP signature