Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] Voting process amendment

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Sergey A. Lipnevich" <sergey AT sourcemage.org>
  • To: SM Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Voting process amendment
  • Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 12:18:33 -0500

Jeremy Blosser (emrys) wrote:
I don't trust Verisign much anyway after their recent stunts, although I have to kind of trust them every time I buy something online, because I have no choice. Self-signed certificates are appropriate for a voting application I think. Eric can sign the certificate so we know it can be trusted, and that's it. I hope he charges less than Verisign for this :-).

That's not really how it works. Eric would have to create a CA to do that,
Not necessarily. I agree that it's not scalable to all Web visitors, but for developers a single self-signed certificate is a good start. I also agree that it's not the best practice to do things this way.
However, I'm not in favor of moving voting to the web sites. It's a whole
lot easier to audit an emailed vote. If it's in drupal we have to be able
Well, the people has spoken :-) and nobody wants to vote online. I'd like to ask then that my voting-only GPG signature is not included into grimoire as I'm not going to sign any spells with it. Can this be done without overhead of any kind?

Sergey.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page