[SGVLUG] Who wants to be the President... (was Proof of
dustin at dogbert.laurences.net
Wed Mar 29 12:04:57 PST 2006
On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 11:08:00AM -0800, Emerson, Tom wrote:
> (at best, Mike is and I was the "moderator" -- I think David has claimed
> the title of press relations, or at the very least doesn't mind taking
> the point on this...)
Huh. If we really had to have one, Matti might be the right candidate.
Though he's absent more often these days....
> Newsletter? We have a newsletter? That's news to me! :)
Of course we have a news letter. This month's is "R".
> > could create a LUG PGP key, but it's hard to see how you
> > would verify that the public key is valid.
> Not a bad idea -- we could create said key at next month's meeting (as a
> bit of "show and tell" on how to do pgp keys) and have anyone/everyone
> in attendance sign it with their key (and reciprocally sign theirs as
Yeah, actually I think that's a good idea, because it creates an example
and gives us a central node in the web of trust all in one go.
Interesting issue, though--how does someone check the credentials of the
SGVLUG key? It doesn't have gubmint ID. I guess all those present who
witnessed the key creation can sign in good faith, but what about next
I guess you'd check the credentials of the LUG keymaster (er, but how do
you know they are the keymaster)? We'd need a "keymaster" then. More
titles! But I forget--does the keymaster get to kiss Sigourney Weaver
or is she the keymaster and I'm thinking of the gatekeeper. (Boy, does
that joke date me.)
You know, we *do* need a gatekeeper. That would be the person who
maintains the "open the door please" button or otherwise makes sure we
can get into the building.
Maybe we can waive the keymaster/gatekeeper kiss and just go straight to
the scene where Sigourney is floating above the bed. :-)
> ...The fact that the lug's key is signed by so many lends credence
> to it's validity, and anyone signed by that key would be a defacto
Oh, sure, it would work fine for us, I was just thinking that it's
meaningless for the LDS. I could just as easily create a key myself and
claim it's the SGVLUG key, and they'd never know the difference. It
might even be true if I then offered to be the LUG keymaster after the
> ...(or I suppose we could make a signed list available as
> appropriate -- probably just by name only as people tend to be skittish
> about easily accessed lists of e-mail addresses...)
GPG will generate a list of keys that have been signed, won't it?
That's the list--key descriptions and fingerprints.
What about getting the LUG webserver a CACert signature while we're at
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.sgvlug.net/pipermail/sgvlug/attachments/20060329/fb6b6fda/attachment.bin
More information about the SGVLUG