Hi Folks,
First, thanks for all your answers.
The proposal for using AES128-CBC with a fixed IV of all zeros is for a
protocol between two entities that will be exchanging messages. This is being
done in a standards body (OMA) and many of the attendees have very little
security experience. As
Ian,
Hmmm... last I heard, qualified certificates can only be issued to
individuals, and invoicing (of the e-form that the regulations speak)
can only be done by VAT-registered companies.
True.
Is that not the case? How is Germany resolving the contradictions?
By using pseudonyms within
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 10:32:58PM -0700, Aram Perez wrote:
Hi Folks,
First, thanks for all your answers.
The proposal for using AES128-CBC with a fixed IV of all zeros is for a
protocol between two entities that will be exchanging messages. This is being
done in a standards body (OMA)
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 22:32:58 -0700
Aram Perez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Folks,
First, thanks for all your answers.
The proposal for using AES128-CBC with a fixed IV of all zeros is for
a protocol between two entities that will be exchanging messages.
This is being done in a standards
Aram Perez wrote:
The proposal for using AES128-CBC with a fixed IV of all zeros is for
a protocol between two entities that will be exchanging messages.
This is being done in a standards body (OMA) and many of the
attendees have very little security experience.
We don't let a bunch of
Stefan Kelm wrote:
Same with digital timestamping.
Here in Europe, e-invoicing very slowly seems to be
becoming a (or should I say the?) long-awaited
application for (qualified) electronic signatures.
Since electronic invoices need to be archived in
most countries some vendors apply
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm26.htm#60 crypto component services - is there
a market
slightly related discussion of x9.59 financial standard protocol
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/x959.html#x959
supporting hash of invoice in any dispute resolution ... thread from a couple
weeks ago
