From bfe57a7a88a71e2235d0131067287b1021077530 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: infominer33 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 23:09:00 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] fix broken link --- Gemfile.lock | 24 +++++++++++++++---- .../id-initiatives/ethereum/cryptonomica.md | 2 +- 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/Gemfile.lock b/Gemfile.lock index 6c2d0dc4..c66a8219 100644 --- a/Gemfile.lock +++ b/Gemfile.lock @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ GEM octokit (~> 4.0) public_suffix (~> 3.0) typhoeus (~> 1.3) - html-pipeline (2.10.0) + html-pipeline (2.11.0) activesupport (>= 2) nokogiri (>= 1.4) http_parser.rb (0.6.0) @@ -145,6 +145,9 @@ GEM jekyll-sitemap (1.2.0) jekyll (~> 3.3) jekyll-swiss (0.4.0) + jekyll-target-blank (1.1.1) + jekyll (~> 3.0) + nokogiri (~> 1.8.2) jekyll-theme-architect (0.1.1) jekyll (~> 3.5) jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.0) @@ -200,15 +203,15 @@ GEM rb-inotify (~> 0.9, >= 0.9.7) ruby_dep (~> 1.2) mercenary (0.3.6) - mini_portile2 (2.4.0) + mini_portile2 (2.3.0) minima (2.5.0) jekyll (~> 3.5) jekyll-feed (~> 0.9) jekyll-seo-tag (~> 2.1) minitest (5.11.3) multipart-post (2.0.0) - nokogiri (1.10.2) - mini_portile2 (~> 2.4.0) + nokogiri (1.8.5) + mini_portile2 (~> 2.3.0) octokit (4.14.0) sawyer (~> 0.8.0, >= 0.5.3) pathutil (0.16.2) @@ -223,7 +226,7 @@ GEM ruby_dep (1.5.0) rubyzip (1.2.2) safe_yaml (1.0.5) - sass (3.7.3) + sass (3.7.4) sass-listen (~> 4.0.0) sass-listen (4.0.0) rb-fsevent (~> 0.9, >= 0.9.4) @@ -245,7 +248,18 @@ PLATFORMS DEPENDENCIES github-pages + jekyll-feed + jekyll-gist jekyll-include-cache + jekyll-mentions + jekyll-optional-front-matter + jekyll-paginate + jekyll-readme-index + jekyll-redirect-from + jekyll-seo-tag + jekyll-sitemap + jekyll-target-blank + jemoji BUNDLED WITH 2.0.1 diff --git a/_pages/id-initiatives/ethereum/cryptonomica.md b/_pages/id-initiatives/ethereum/cryptonomica.md index 6868b77f..e1ca2284 100644 --- a/_pages/id-initiatives/ethereum/cryptonomica.md +++ b/_pages/id-initiatives/ethereum/cryptonomica.md @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ Often the keys for the client-bank systems are created this way. > >We offer exactly the solution for this problem that is mentioned in Wikipedia as not yet found. We deny automatic key check, we are offering the user to check and download each key manually. > ->We make verification of key owner's identity and store data about this verification: who, when, using which document made verification. And unlike in ['Web of trust']((https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy#Web_of_trust)) there is an established procedure for key verification, i.e. known rules according to witch identity of the key owner have to be proven. +>We make verification of key owner's identity and store data about this verification: who, when, using which document made verification. And unlike in ['Web of trust'](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy#Web_of_trust) there is an established procedure for key verification, i.e. known rules according to witch identity of the key owner have to be proven. > >The user can make the information of the key or keys in the database available to all other users of the database, or available only for specified users or user group. Accordingly database user will have access to data about keys of others users, which is open to all users or shared with him, (for some cases, i.e. for arbitrators, including scans on the paper documents) >