3 ms·
Since you are doing crypto, chances are high you are doing it wrong the first approaches. Considering this, my choice would be to start with a believable pseud
by noerps 13y ago
Since you are doing crypto, chances are high you are doing it wrong the first approaches.
Considering this, my choice would be to start with a believable pseudonym and generate a gpg- and/or rsa-key to sign stuff and tie it to that psudonym.
If something goes wrong you simply revoke and nothing happend. For the rare occasion of success you can still prove your are that person.
- not_satoshi 13y agoI totally agree that first attempts may be "doing it wrong", and peer review is needed to strengthen the security through the cleansing fire of criticism. Theoretically, a collaboration of many developers where some, many, or all use pseudonyms, could be workable. (For instance, it looks like the I2P git repo is itself located (hidden?) on the I2P network.) My thought was indeed to establish verifiable pseudonymity through the usual public key cryptography tools.