On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 04:54:48PM -0500, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > Under what legal theory might a certificate -- or a key! -- be > considered "property"? There wouldn't seem to be enough creativity in > a certificate, let alone a key, to qualify for copyright protection.
Private and secret keys had better be property. Public keys are... well, *public*, and CA public keys really, really had better be public, so I'm as perplexed as you. Most likely this is just a case of lawyers gone wild. Too bad a TV show or DVD product based on that idea wouldn't be successful. > I won't even comment on the rest of the CPS, not even such gems as > "Subscribers warrant that ... their private key is protected and that > no unauthorized person has ever had access to the Subscriber's private > key." And just how can I tell that? Really, really wild lawyers. (Or maybe not so wild, in the U.S., depending on what happens in the Lori Drew case.) Nico -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majord...@metzdowd.com