Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 18:54:22 -0500 (CDT) From: Robert Bonomi <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of? Message-ID: <201206062354.q56NsMAA037016@mail.r-bonomi.com> In-Reply-To: <4FCFE342.2050809@cran.org.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Wed Jun 6 18:13:09 2012 > Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 00:09:54 +0100 > From: Bruce Cran <bruce@cran.org.uk> > To: Robert Bonomi <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com> > Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware > of? > > On 06/06/2012 20:27, Robert Bonomi wrote: > > Suppose I put up a web app that takes an executable as input, signs it > > with my key, and returns the signed filt to the submitter. I don't > > divulge the key to anyone, just use it on 'anything'. Anybody > > attempting to revoke on _that_ basis is asking for a lawsuit. > > To me it would be perfectly reasonable to revoke the key as soon as you > signed the first piece of malware. It may seem reasonable to you, but is there -legal- basis to do so? 'signing' only provides assurance of the identity of the signer. I did sign it. The key has not been compromised. The software in question is tracable to the signer, but the signer never claimed it was 'error free', what conract or statute did they breach by doing the signing?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201206062354.q56NsMAA037016>