CDR: Re: Public Key Infrastructure: An Artifact...

[Ed Gerck]

Greg Broiles wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 16, 2000 at 03:53:28PM -0800, Ed Gerck wrote:
> > > http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/II/PKIMisFit.html
> > >
> > > Public Key Infrastructure: An Artifact Ill-Fitted to the Needs of the
> > > Information Society
> > >
> > > Abstract
> > >
> > > It has been conventional wisdom that, for e-commerce to fulfill its
> > > potential, each party to a transaction must be confident in the identity of
> > > the others.
> >
> > This is the law for commerce, except for cash transactions of non-controlled
> > goods. Firearm sales usually require proof of identity (at least) even for a
> > cash transaction.
>
> That's a matter of state law - Federal law doesn't (yet) regulate firearm
> transactions between two residents of the same state where neither is
> licensed federally as a firearms dealer, so long as the firearms themselves
> aren't specially controlled (like Class 3 full-auto weapons, or short-
> barreled rifles/shotguns, etc).

That is why I wote "usually" -- it may vary.

> Nevertheless, the main point above is wrong, too - commercial law certainly
> does NOT require parties to be confident about the identity of counterparties.

So, you think that  credit-cards deals would not need names or any real-life id, just assets?

Surely, the merchant gets paid regardless, even  if you use a false name.  But this is not the
end of id fraud. The bank still goes after the money...and uses the law against fraudulent
practices to enforce the cardholder agreement, or criminal statues. If Mr. X uses his wife's
credit-card, Mr. X is technically committing id fraud, and wire-fraud. Of course it works most
of the time... But when it does not, and someone comes enforcing, someone will ask, did you
Mr X, uses Mrs X's credit-card, and represent yourself thereby as Mrs X?

Cheers,

Ed Gerck