Re: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael Hitachi)

2000-10-27 Thread Ed Gerck
own, is the best way to verify whether it works well -- as efficiently and as securely as desired. This is the way to gain confidence, by testing. Trust is earned. Cheers, Ed Gerck

Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: FirstMonday August 2000)

2000-10-20 Thread Ed Gerck
the liability issues for the different parties involved. In this scenario, what if we see a blind push for a global PKI and also include non-repudiation as an "absolute authentication" based on some mythical "trusted machines" -- as has been suggested recently in the good name of e-commerce? Cheers, Ed Gerck

Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000)

2000-10-18 Thread Ed Gerck
cluding lawyers and lawmakers, are prevented from using it in a perverted way just because RFCs are written in English. Cheers, Ed Gerck

Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000)

2000-10-18 Thread Ed Gerck
"Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: At 11:21 AM -0700 10/17/2000, Ed Gerck wrote: As Tony Bartoletti wrote, apologies for what seems a rant, but the "solid mathematical foundations" underlying digital signatures, "Qualified Certificates", unmistakable IDs, biomet

Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000)

2000-10-16 Thread Ed Gerck
. When theory meets the real world, some slippage will occur. and that is why I think such debates are interesting. We need to see the different sides of truth rather than believing that there is just one truth -- which is, of course, the one we have (invariably so, it seems) ;-) Cheers, Ed Gerck

Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000)

2000-10-15 Thread Ed Gerck
non-repudiation" by banks worldwide is very similar to "a service that prevents the denial of an act". Cheers, Ed Gerck "Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: My concern is that the vast majority of informed lay people, lawyers, judges, legislators, etc. will hear "non

Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000)

2000-10-10 Thread Ed Gerck
-ietf-pkix-technr or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pkix-technr-01.txt Cheers, Ed Gerck

Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000)

2000-08-10 Thread Ed Gerck
a reference, I would like to have it. Different banks are in different points of the learning curve. Cheers, Ed Gerck Rich Salz wrote: Ed Gerck wrote: Why have banks moved and are moving more and more a w a y from paper? To save money. Security has little to do with, compared to the effect

Re: CyberPatrol sues cryptanalysts who revealed flaws in itssoftware

2000-03-20 Thread Ed Gerck
Tom Vogt wrote: Ed Gerck wrote: I guess that there is no doubt that reverse engineering is illegal when the software copyright owner so denies. I don't guess so. for example, norway has a law that allows reverse-engineering and explicitly says that this right can not be taken away