1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://gitlab.com/hagrid-keyserver/hagrid.git synced 2023-02-13 20:55:02 -05:00
hagrid-keyserver--hagrid/dist/templates/about/faq.html.hbs
Vincent Breitmoser 7afa00bffc
add FAQ page
2019-06-05 15:15:42 +02:00

60 lines
2.5 KiB
Handlebars

{{#> layout }}
<div class="about">
<center><h2><a href="/about">About</a> | <a href="/about/usage">Usage</a> | FAQ | <a href="/about/privacy">Privacy Policy</a> | <a href="/about/api">API</a></h2></center>
<h3>Why not sign keys after verification?</h3>
The <span class="brand">keys.openpgp.org</span> service is meant for key
distribution and discovery, not as a de-facto CA. Client implementations
that want to offer verified communication should rely on their own trust
model.
<h3>Why not encrypt verification e-mails?</h3>
Various reasons:
<ol>
<li>It is more complicated, both for our users and for us.</li>
<li>It doesn't prevent attacks - an attacker gains nothing from
uploading a key they don't have access to.</li>
<li>Deletion would still have to be possible even when a key is
lost.</li>
<li>It would require a different (and more complicated) mechanism to
upload keys that can only sign.</li>
</ol>
<h3>Is <span class="brand">keys.openpgp.org</span> part of the "SKS" pool?</h3>
<p>No. The "append-only" federation model of the SKS pool leads to various
problems, that make both operation and use of those servers very
difficult. There is also no simple way to store information about
e-mail verification in a federated way.
</p>
<p>We do plan to explore options for a distributed service in the future, so
users can choose between different service operators again.
</p>
<!--
<ul>
<li><b>Do not distribute unverified or malicious data</b>
<p>Unlike traditional keyservers, <tt>keys.openpgp.org</tt> does not
distribute key material that isn't cryptographically verified.
This protects keys from unwanted spam, and helps protect the
service itself against "denial of service" attacks.
</p>
<p>We also do not distribute "third-party" signatures on keys. These
kinds of signatures were typically used to "sign" the keys of
others, in order to support a "Web of Trust" trust model. This
model meant that third parties could attach arbitrary spam to
any key, but didn't prove itself as a very effective trust model
in practice.
</p>
<p>We are open to alternative approaches that might be implemented
in the future, that avoid this issue.
</p>
</li>
</ul>
-->
</div>
{{/layout}}