At 10:14 AM 1/7/2004 -0500, Jerrold Leichter wrote:
Now that we've trashed non-repudiation ... just how is it different from
authentication? In both cases, there is a clear technical meaning (though as
with anything in mathematics, when you get right down to it, the details are
complex and may be
| Non-repudiation applied to digital signatures implies that the definition
| states that only one person possibly had possession of the private signing
| key and was conscious about the fact that it was used to sign something.
There is absolutely *no* cryptographic or mathematical content to this
Jerrold Leichter wrote:
Now that we've trashed non-repudiation ...
Huh? Processes that can be conclusive are useful and do exist, I read here,
in the legal domain. It may not be so clear how such processes can exist in
the technical domain and that's why I'm posting ;-)
just how is it
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 11:30:45 -0500, Ian Grigg said:
such keys to give them extra time to revoke the keys. However one
addresss was from killfile.org and actually a mail-news gateway ...
Was said key was being used to sign messages of some
authentication importance?
I don't know.
art.
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 11:20:10 -0800, Anton Stiglic said:
From: Ralf Senderek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Maybe we can learn that code re-use is tricky in cryptography: indeed, if
the signing function and encryption function did not use the same gen_k
function, the author of the code would have done the
Ed Gerck wrote:
Likewise, in a communication process, when repudiation of an act by a party is
anticipated, some system security designers find it useful to define
non-repudiation
as a service that prevents the effective denial of an act. Thus, lawyers should
not squirm when we feel the
Non-repudiation is really very simple in concept.
The ability to prove to a third party that you (or someone else) was party
to a transaction.
There are a lot of problems regarding who the third party must be, what
constitutes proof, etc., etc.
In the English common-law system, this is applied
/. is reporting this, anyone know the real story?
Verisign Certificate Expiration Causes Multiple Problems
Posted by michael on Thursday January 08, @03:46PM
from the rot-at-the-root dept.
We had to do a little sleuthing today. Many readers wrote in with
problems that turned out to be
This article recently ran in Die Zeit in Germany about Cyber Punks.
I was ofcourse misquoted in the article, see my detraction about what was
wrong:
http://talk.org/archives/000193.html
http://www.zeit.de/2003/50/Cypherpunks (original in German)
http://talk.org/archives/000211.html (This
I did a Google search on irrebuttable presumption and found a lot
of interesting material. One research report on the State of
Connecticut web site
http://www.cga.state.ct.us/2003/olrdata/ph/rpt/2003-R-0422.htm
says: The Connecticut Supreme Court and the U. S. Supreme Court have
held that
10 matches
Mail list logo
