When encryption is also authentication...

Mike Rosing eresrch at eskimo.com
Thu May 30 08:46:21 PDT 2002

On Thu, 30 May 2002, cypherpunk_reader wrote:

> If the end user insists on e-signing a document without having read it it is
> there perogative,
> but I think there should be a better system in place to insure that they
> either read it or that
> they did not read it but agree anyway.

I don't think so.  If they are fool enough to sign a document without
reading it, it's the same as using a pen to sign a contract without
reading it.  A fool is a fool, why try to protect them?  It's pretty
hopeless to try because fools are so clever!

I don't have a problem with a signing system that requires the user to
do something (like maybe even use a pda stylus and actually sign with
their own handwriting), but *forcing* them to read a contract is just
plain silly.  When enough fools have been burned by a scam, the word
will get out and the rest of the fools who don't read contracts might
think about not signing.

An e-signature can have the same weight in law as an ink one, and the
same rules apply.  A fool and their money are soon parted.

Patience, persistence, truth,
Dr. mike

More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list