Hi,

I am glad to be back on this mailing list:) Please read the
whole thread at the official unicode mailing list:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

I think it is archieved at yahoo.

On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Markus Kuhn wrote:
[...]

> trusted display component. Or is worry merely about someone recently
> using Yudit for something it really wasn't designed for?

I was thinking about the future of Unicode in the age of
digital signatures. I had the following questions in my head:

1. Is Unicode secure? If it is not secure, can it be made secure?
  This question is important because people may want to sign
  text files in their own languuage. They want to send unambiguous
  emails too. An unsecure standard/system with social engineering
  would undermine national security.

2. The possibility of a seemingly secure standard that can be
  used with a software that has intentional or unintentional
  back-doors.
  This is important:
  last week I just watched from my Linux box  Windows guys running
  around with virus scanners and having all Windows machines in
  a bad shape. I don't want to experience the same mess in Linux.

  What if the software we are using would have built in sanity checks
  using reversible algorithms to convert the bitstream to a view, and
  convert it back to check if we get back the same stream? What
  they call in Yudit a software flaw - converting to view and back
  is in fact its merit - all algorithms used are reversable so far.

I just asked #1 at unicode consortium but there is a communication
breakdown and I unsubscribed. What forum shall I use?

Thank you,
gaspar

--
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/

Reply via email to