One key used by two identities

Never, but nothing dramatic happens

You had a working key already. Making another one seemed like extra effort for no benefit, so the same key went behind both names. Nothing broke. The two identities are now the same identity wearing two labels.

Osiris market addresses

osiriseultmx3so5ef6ayasy4kdyekbywr7pyggpmjazeogxoyaodsyd.onion

osirislivpetlbabbl3zzqhupurfkxxbzbheu3bkrshkaiwg2hcxbyqd.onion

osirisydmlx47esm6ylhzhtnjrucgnymi7beqoyzze5jn3opbr3zy4id.onion

Printed as supplied, in no order. Nothing here is watched or timed, so an address that loads is not proof of anything. More about the set

1.What the key is actually doing

People think of a key as equipment. Something you install once and stop thinking about, like a lock. That is true of the private half sitting on your machine. It is not true of the public half, which spends its life being shown to strangers as proof of who you are.

The public half is a name. Nobody chose it, which makes it feel neutral. It is not neutral. It is the most exact identifier in this section.

Window opens: When the second identity first uses the key.
Window closes: At once, silently, on first use.
What closes it: One fingerprint appearing under two names.
Still possible after: Keep any third identity on its own key.

2.Two names, one signature

A username match is an argument. A key match is not. There is nothing to debate about two identical fingerprints. The two names are joined by arithmetic.

Compared with a handle you brought with you, which is one more thing that matches, a shared key is the thing everything else gets matched against.

ImportantA key shown under a name has been shown, and that part belongs to a public key posted under your handle. This page is only about the second use, and the second use is the one that joins.

3.Generating a fresh key afterwards

The first wrong belief is that making a new key separates the two identities from that point on. It separates what happens next. It does nothing to what has already happened, which is a pair of names with one fingerprint underneath.

The late key change has a second problem, the same shape as the rename problem earlier. A key that appears suddenly, announced, replacing an old one, is an event. Events get dated, and a dated event touching both identities draws another line between them.

Read moreWhat is still possible once it has shutThe general answer, which applies cleanly here.

4.A key is not just a tool

The second wrong belief is quieter. It assumes that because a key does a technical job, it is a technical object with no social meaning. How keys actually get used argues the opposite. They are quoted in profiles, kept in other people's files, compared and passed around.

Treat the fingerprint the way you would treat a legal name you cannot change and cannot mistype. That framing makes the decision obvious without any mathematics, and it is what the rule keeps coming back to.

5.The cost is slow

Nothing happens today. No system flags the reuse and both identities carry on as before. That is not luck, it is the nature of everything in this branch. The cost, if there ever is one, comes later and comes from things lining up.

So the right response is mild. Not panic, and not a frantic evening of deleting, because deleting is what produces the dated event. Just a calm decision about how the next identity gets set up.

6.The plain summary

Separate identities need separate keys from the first minute.

Separation is something you build at the start or do not have. It cannot be added later, because the thing that would need changing is already in other people's hands.

If real separation matters, a fresh start is the only reset, and this is the item that makes that literally true. From here on, one key per identity, decided before the identity exists.

Read nextAn address saved and forgottenA gentler item, with something practical at the end.

Questions people send in

Both identities are mine. Why does the link matter?

Because the point of two identities is usually that they should not be read as one person. If they were always meant to be read together, ignore the page. If not, the shared key already answers the question.

Can I revoke the old key and undo this?

Revocation is a statement about the future, and it is published, which makes it one more dated record touching both names. Sometimes right for other reasons. Never a way to unjoin anything.

Is this worse than reusing a handle?

Harder to argue with, which is not the same as worse. A handle match invites doubt. A fingerprint match does not. Neither causes anything to happen today.