Hiding Confusion

[Tad Carlucci]

In the development of Public Key Cryptography (such as PGP and HTTPS web-page security) we had the problem of "trust" in a real sense. We needed someone who both parties could trust to sign our keys. Microsoft can sign my key, but they have a strong profit motive, so some refuse to trust them. RSA can sign my keys, but they take US Government research money, so some can't or won't trust them. Some third-parties have come along but we don't really know who they are .. so can we really trust them? Without complete trust in that third party, the public key system collapses (evidence: continuing problems with secure web page hijacking, falsified digital signatures, etc.).

So, when you see a pedigree, with the claims made, such as the attachment, it comes down to trust. If you know the person, and trust the veracity of their claims, fine. But if you don't, well .. buyer be ware. I'm told that Saga has verified the claims .. I've not seen it myself, but I'll accept it exists and is findable .. and, knowing her work, I'd trust that and her verification of the claim. But not everyone knows Saga's work and it's a safe bet not everyone fully trusts her work.

The second issue of trust is fully on the claimant. It says "100% Guaranteed" .. what if, despite all efforts by the breeder and trusted third parties, the claim turns out to be false? Is there a recourse? I'm told (not verified myself) that the offspring was priced very high. Does the guarantee mean "or your money back" which is what one would expect from common usage of the term (and the Uniform Commercial Code)? Not only is trust being asked in the claim, but trust is also being asked in the idea that there is some guarantee of safety offered by the claimant. You might know the vendor, and trust that some compensation would be forthcoming should the claim turn out to be incorrect. Or you might know someone you trust who can assure you that is the case. But if neither is the case, well .. again .. buyer be ware.

It's unfortunate that one person's pedigree and claim are being discussed because that person will likely feel they are being singled out unfairly. But we see so many claims of "Offspring of This" and "Hides That" which prove to be false, that this one SEEMS simply just another example of that larger problem.

Developing that "web of trust" is hard enough. All the false and misleading claims just make it harder. Perhaps the KittyCatS community can come together and find some third party who can verify such claims. But, experience says even that won't fully solve the issue.