[OSGeo-Board] Bylaws posted

[Markus Neteler]

Hi Rich,

On 2/23/06, Rich Steele <Rich.Steele at autodesk.com> wrote:
>
> ...
> "article IV: sec 4.2, second paragraph. Does it make sense to
> add/suggest digitally signed messages via GnuPG? I would at least
> recommend the use of GnuPG."
>
> Is encryption really required for notices?  The purpose of this section
> is simply to ensure that a person receives actual notice of a scheduled
> meeting.  The law permits sending an email to suffice as notice so long
> as the recipient has consented and provided a specific email address.
> Can you explain why you would recommend GnuPG in this situation?  I'm
> not sure I understand.




In general, there are two modes:
1. encryption of messages (think hiding, doesn't apply here)
2. digital signing (think ensuring that the mail really originated from the
sender,
    message is *not* encrypted)

I thought of (2) to ensure that the sender is really the sender. This is
done by
a pair of public/private key,

GnuPG, because it's a free implementation for both (1) and (2), see
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnupg . There are plugins for most email
software packages available.

The correct term to refer to will be OpenPGP, see
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenPGP

Of course the dissemination of info isn't that complicated,
I meant in fact to digitally sign votes etc. which are sent over
email.

Two days ago, I had only 5 min to hack down my comments in
a break, now I am back home. I hope this clarifies my comment
(somewhat).

 Markus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20060226/7ba00456/attachment.htm>