 | | Re: posting varification, ug! —Dan Boger
| | | | (...) PGP keys are unrelated to nntp - and they could be used to verify that a user is who he says he is. However, there's a development cost to setting this up (trust me, I tried working on a script to do just that!), and PGP will not be a good (...) (23 years ago, 10-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: posting varification, ug! —Jennifer L. Boger
| | | | | | (...) is who he says he is. However, there's a development cost to setting this up (trust me, I tried working on a script to do just that!), and PGP will not be a good solution for all (most?) users - users who like posting from multiple machines, (...) (23 years ago, 10-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: posting varification, ug! —David Eaton
| | | | | (...) Yep. I guess the question I have is, to what extent can they be tied into the various interfaces? For NNTP and email, I'd imagine they're fairly easy. For web, it'd be more difficult I assume. (...) I guess my inclination (in a perfect world) (...) (23 years ago, 13-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: posting varification, ug! —Dan Boger
| | | | | (...) but if you're a member, and you're posting via the web, LUGNET already knows who you are... no need for pgp there... unless you mean as a way to post without being logged in? (...) heh, why make users choose? if you're a member, you _can_ (...) (23 years ago, 13-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: posting varification, ug! —David Eaton
| | | | | (...) Well, as in you're not logged in because you are either not a member, you're not accepting cookies, or something else. (...) Oh? So PGP authorization is currently in effect for members who have uploaded their PGP key and post with NNTP/SMTP? (...) (23 years ago, 13-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | |
