After takin' a swig o' grog, Tim Smith belched out
this bit o' wisdom:
> In article <REfil.776$MK6.386@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Chris Ahlstrom <ahlstromc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> Well, I know now that Roy sent it. But the PGP key means nothing.
>> >>
>> >> Just about every part of a post can be faked, with the right ISP.
>> >
>> > You can't fake someone's PGP signature without access to their private
>> > key, even with the right ISP, as the ISP doesn't have access to the
>> > private key.
>>
>> What did you see in my post?
>
> A GPG signature that I didn't bother to check.
>
>> How many times have you bothered to verify the signing in any COLA newsgroup
>> message?
>
> Twice. First time was yesterday, when I read Roy's post, concluded it was
> an obvious fake, but then couldn't see anything wrong in the headers.
I thought the same thing, but didn't bother to check the signature.
> Second time was just now, when I checked the one in your post a couple back,
> and got this:
>
> gpg: Signature made Tue Feb 3 14:40:40 2009 PST using DSA key ID 74572E8E
> gpg: BAD signature from "Roy Schestowitz <sch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>"
Well, now we know it works! ;->
Thanks, Tim. Cool!
--
At the heart of science is an essential tension between two seemingly
contradictory attitudes -- an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre
or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny
of all ideas, old and new. This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep
nonsense. Of course, scientists make mistakes in trying to understand the
world, but there is a built-in error-correcting mechanism: The collective
enterprise of creative thinking and skeptical thinking together keeps the
field on track.
-- Carl Sagan, "The Fine Art of Baloney Detection," Parade, February 1, 1987
|
|
