From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <overseers-return-7337-listarch-overseers=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 27267 invoked by alias); 10 Aug 2004 17:28:09 -0000
Mailing-List: contact overseers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/overseers/>
List-Post: <mailto:overseers@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:overseers-help@sources.redhat.com>,
	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: overseers-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 27257 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2004 17:28:08 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 10 Aug 2004 17:28:08 -0000
Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7AHS8e1020662
	for <overseers@sourceware.org>; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:28:08 -0400
Received: from pobox.toronto.redhat.com (pobox.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.4])
	by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i7AHS8a26330;
	Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:28:08 -0400
Received: from touchme.toronto.redhat.com (IDENT:postfix@touchme.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.9])
	by pobox.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i7AHS7XP017677;
	Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:28:07 -0400
Received: from toenail.toronto.redhat.com (toenail.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.211])
	by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A04E18001A1; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:28:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from toenail.toronto.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by toenail.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.5) with ESMTP id i7AHS7eP011021;
	Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:28:07 -0400
Received: (from fche@localhost)
	by toenail.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i7AHS6J4011019;
	Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:28:06 -0400
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:34:00 -0000
From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
Cc: overseers@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: ssh key
Message-ID: <20040810172805.GA11008@redhat.com>
References: <kfhpt639brz.fsf@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> <20040807165503.GA28332@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <orbrhk7oe0.fsf@livre.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <20040809143322.GA31695@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <or3c2uud93.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="opJtzjQTFsWo+cga"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <or3c2uud93.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
X-SW-Source: 2004-q3/txt/msg00094.txt.bz2


--opJtzjQTFsWo+cga
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-length: 527

Hi -

On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 02:14:16PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> [...]  I'm just thinking it might be reasonable to have, as
> part of the sign-up procedure, a gpg pubkey registration, and demand
> such requests to be signed with the corresponding privkey.

But how would that solve the typical problem that appears here, which
is that people lose their old ssh private keys (due to change of hardware
or fatfingering rm or whatever)?  Files in $HOME/.gnupg are not much more
likely to survive than $HOME/.ssh.

- FChE

--opJtzjQTFsWo+cga
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-length: 189

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBGQWlVZbdDOm/ZT0RAkgUAJwJUPHkvZrVA1yQJilK39v/YaGxqQCdEOku
vaeRSXD2ueX+ds2bwJKLBwc=
=7FuB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--opJtzjQTFsWo+cga--