Welcome to DebConf Video Etherpad!

This pad text is synchronized as you type, so that everyone viewing this page sees the same text. This allows you to collaborate seamlessly on documents!

To get started click the 👥 button in the top/bottom right and log in.

Get involved with Etherpad at https://etherpad.org

What about defining some (few) signature policies, then publish wich policy is used through signatures notations !?
cf: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4880#section-5.2.3.16

Why the owner of a GPG Key can't delete certificates of other persons appended to it? What will be the problem?

because of SKS architecture
The solution may come from WKS/WKD protocol (I am waiting for the speaker to talk about it)

An other solution is to extend PKS protocol in ways like Gunnar Wolf is talking about. In such cases I think keyservers themselves should rely on web of trust when distributing keys, eg each keyserver should prove it is maintained by one (or some) human(s) in the WoT.

I unsdertand, that protocol replicate, never deletes. But the owner could revoke as it does with his key. And thanks!

Can we talk about :
    * WKS/WKD (https://wiki.gnupg.org/WKD)
    * autocrypt (https://autocrypt.org/)
    * TLS with OpenPGP (eg: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6091.html )


    The GDPR sucks as it feed confusions between personnal and private datas. Not all personnal data should be considered as private. Some like at least one email (secured with OpenPGP), should be considered as public.
    Extensive use of OpenPGP WoT may be an elegant solution against spamming or fishing issues.