[17310] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Digital signatures have a big problem with meaning
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (dan@geer.org)
Wed Jun 1 11:54:47 2005
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
From: dan@geer.org
To: Ian G <iang@systemics.com>
Cc: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 01 Jun 2005 10:37:20 BST."
<200506011037.29069.iang@systemics.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 10:07:59 -0400
Ian G writes:
|
| In the end, the digital signature was just crypto
| candy...
|
On the one hand a digital signature should matter more
the bigger the transaction that it protects. On the
other hand, the bigger the transaction the lower the
probability that it is between strangers who have no
other leverage for recourse.
And, of course, proving anything by way of dueling
experts doesn't provide much predictability in a jury
system, e.g., OJ Simpson.
--dan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
