[17891] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: the limits of crypto and authentication
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perry E. Metzger)
Thu Jul 14 12:57:43 2005
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
To: Aram Perez <aramperez@mac.com>
Cc: cryptography@metzdowd.com
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:36:35 -0400
In-Reply-To: <7B673B48-D589-4F43-A139-DCD85F0C43B3@mac.com> (Aram Perez's
message of "Thu, 14 Jul 2005 07:59:16 -0700")
Aram Perez <aramperez@mac.com> writes:
> While the SET protocol was complicated, it's failure had nothing to
> do with that fact or the lack of USB on PCs. You could buy libraries
> that implemented the protocol and the protocol did not require USB.
> IMO, the failure had to do with time-to-market factors. In the late
> 90s, when ecommerce was just at it's infancy and you took the risk of
> setting up a web store, were you going to wait you could integrate a
> SET toolkit into you web site and until your customers had SET
> wallets installed on their PCs before selling a product? Or were you
> going to sell to anyone who used a web browser that supported SSL? It
> was very simple economics, even if you had to pay VeriSign $400 for
> your SSL certificate and pay Visa/MasterCard a higher fee.
You are perfectly right on this. I oversimplified and distorted.
Still, I suspect that while the time was not right for SET back then,
the time may nearly be right for better things now.
Perry
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
