[5964] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: IP: [FP] California inaugurates digital signatures - cnn.com
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ed Gerck)
Thu Oct 21 11:01:28 1999
Message-ID: <380EB9E1.B75BD059@nma.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 23:59:45 -0700
From: Ed Gerck <egerck@nma.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bram <bram@gawth.com>
Cc: Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>, cryptography@c2.net,
cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
bram wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Robert Hettinga wrote:
>
> > "Lie in X.509, Go to Jail", pt. 2
> >
> > [snip]
>
> I don't don't understand what the big deal is - fraud is fraud, even if
> it's in plaintext email. Making digital signatures have the same legal
> staatus as physical signatures doesn't change that at all.
Some people believe that simply passing a law that makes digital
signature legally binding will also make them bind to the market ;-) the Utah
legislation, though useful as an early discussion, left its proponents actually
mired in the muck when they saw that it would apply also to them ;-)
Cheers,
Ed Gerck
