--On Monday, September 21, 2015 15:14 -0400 Paul Wouters <paul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Sure, but it's the way that everyone has used PGP for 20 >> years, and it's the security model that everyone I know >> expects when they use PGP keys. > > Actually, nmost people I know never use the WoT. They only use > keys > obtained directly from the person they want to exchange > encrypted email with. Paul, I have no doubt that is true, but I think it has a lot to do with Harald's comments about tools and George's comments about models. First, I know a lot of people who insist on keys who are handed to them directly (or mailed with in-person or other out of band transfer and verification of fingerprints). I know almost as many who almost exclusively pull things off keyservers. Especially with those tools that will not allow using a key unless if bears one's personal signature (even if non-exportable), all of those keys are incorporated into that individual's WOT, even if the key is a self-signed one obtained from a keyserver that no person who understood the issues and was sane would rely upon. Consequently, "never use the WOT" either involves a different definition than I've used or I don't understand what it means. Whether those "who to trust and why" decisions are wise or not is another matter (and I think closer to George's concerns). However, if you believe that, because of trust issues, people get keys only from personal contacts rather than indirectly from public databases, why are we discussing yet another public database-based approach? Or are you convinced that the problem with the other public databases is that the DNS is inherently better for some reason such as the inability of third parties not associated with the domain in the address to add keys? Or that the DNS is somehow, inherently, the One True Database to Rule Them All for the Internet? (That is, of course, another variation of my desire that the next version of the document be much more clear about the problem(s) it is trying to solve.) john