When encryption is also authentication...

[Mike Rosing]

On Thu, 30 May 2002, Steve Furlong wrote:

> Summary: Recent laws have attempted to make electronic contracting
> binding, but they have not addressed some of the fundamental principles
> of contract law. These fundamental principles are often stretched or
> broken in electronic contracting. There is no case law on electronic
> contracts. I suspect that a contested electronic contract would be
> easily voided.

Thanks, that was very enlightening.  The URL is good too - they mention
that "An electronic signature is defined as being:

   an electronic sound, symbol or process attached to or
   logically associated with a contract or other record and
   executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign
   the record. "

I would never have thought of making a sound as part of a signature!
but for voice prints, it might be a good idea.

> OK, that's the way I think it is, currently in the US. The way I think
> it _should_ be is much more caveat emptor, as Dr Mike and others have
> said, but the legislators and judges have neglected to ask for my input.

Yes, and even if we tried to give input nobody would listen to me :-)

Most of the issues here are human interface, what is reasonable to expect
for a valid contract.  The only thing I've ever "signed" online is an
order for parts via credit card, and so far it's never been a legal
problem.

But I see where there could be major problems if people aren't really damn
careful, so I'll probably be a lot more careful than I thought I was
before!

Patience, persistence, truth,
Dr. mike