CDR: Schneier: Why Digital Signatures are not Signatures (was Re: CRYPTO-GRAM, November 15, 2000)

Mac Norton mnorton at cavern.uark.edu
Wed Nov 15 20:34:42 PST 2000


I think we knew that, but the particular problem posited here is
that Alice's sig can be associated with a record she never saw,
an acute symptom, not a chronic one, I'd hope. But I have asked
for education in that regard, and hope it's forthcoming.
MacN

On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, Jim Choate wrote:

> 
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, R. A. Hettinga forwarded from a 3rd party:
> 
> > > When the same judge sees a digital signature, he doesn't know anything
> > > about Alice's intentions.  He doesn't know if Alice agreed to the document,
> > > or even if she ever saw it.
> 
> It's nice to see somebody else recognize the fundamental flaw with PKC is
> the god-damned key management.
> 
>     ____________________________________________________________________
> 
>                      He is able who thinks he is able.
> 
>                                            Buddha
> 
>        The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
>        Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      ravage at ssz.com
>        www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
>                            -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
>     --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list