Re: [Sks-devel] Re: Delete key from keyserver

[Robert J. Hansen]

 On 9/7/2010 10:57 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> Well yes but ... this is NOT an illegal piece of information until
> litigated afaik.

Imagine some well-meaning but deranged Wikileaks activist decides to
take GIFs of the most salacious Wikileaks documents, creates a phony
public certificate, and a ton of photographic user IDs where each one is
a classified document.  Whether this is an "illegal piece of
information" is really not the question: whether it will put the
keyserver network in a world of hurt is the real question.

(Note: I am not claiming anyone associated with Wikileaks would do such
a thing.  I just like to find other things beyond child porn to use as
examples.)

> And the pubkey was a previously legal piece of information or it never
> would
> have ended up on a SKS keyserver in the first place. Someone changed
> their mind and has a right to their privacy.

You're assuming the certificate originator originally intended to use
the keyserver networks as we intend it to be used.  I think we shouldn't
make that assumption.  The keyserver network is a reliable, scalable,
highly deletion-resistant way to distribute small quantities of
information.  There are a ton of use cases for it which are at odds with
the desires of (one would hope) the great majority of keyserver operators.

> Or am I missing something essential here?

Possibly.  It's just as likely that I am.  :)

73, de kc0sje.

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature