[17374] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Digital signatures have a big problem with meaning
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rich Salz)
Tue Jun 7 18:45:05 2005
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 23:34:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com>
To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <42A4C49E.3030107@garlic.com>
Peter Gutmann wrote:
> Yup, see "Why XML Security is Broken",
> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/xmlsec.txt, for more on this.
Peter's shared earlier drafts with me, and we've exchanged email about this.
The only complaint that has a factual basis is this:
I don't want to have to implement XML processing to do
XML Digital Signatures
The others are just blowing smoke, or "proof by snarkiness." :)
/r$
--
Rich Salz Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
