Re: Proposed Proposed Statement on e-mail encryption at the IETF

Subject: Re: Proposed Proposed Statement on e-mail encryption at the IETF Date: 
Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 03:14:14PM -0400 Quoting Hector Santos 
(hector(_dot_)santos45(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com):
> On 6/2/2015 11:24 AM, Måns Nilsson wrote:
> > The above benefits of signing apply roughly equally well to both
> > methods. /Måns, signing all outgoing e-mail. If e-mail from me is
> > not signed, something is fishy.
> But if you are not signing the mail yourself, its already "fishy."
> Or do you mean sign by some trusted 3rd party and wish for others to
> trust as well?
I'm sorry. I perhaps was unclear. I'm suggesting that people sign what
they send. Not that some middleware identity like a mail list manager
software does it.  The fact that whatever I am  is  signing every mail
supposedly coming from me simply is an indication that the same individual
did originate these messages. Nothing more than that, and that does not,
by itself, look like much, but there are enough benefits in doing that,
not only for me (I'm not likely to forget my pass-phrase if I'm using
it all the time)  but for others -- they for instance can filter on my
signature for whatever purpose they see fit. Including filing to the
loonies folder.

-- 
Måns Nilsson     primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
MN-1334-RIPE                             +46 705 989668
Everybody is going somewhere!!  It's probably a garage sale or a
disaster Movie!!

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature