[505] in Intrusion Detection Systems
Re: Timestamping
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Teresa Lunt)
Sat Jan 27 16:35:32 1996
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 02:52:18 -0500
To: ids@uow.edu.au
From: tlunt@ARPA.MIL (Teresa Lunt)
Reply-To: ids@uow.edu.au
Well, you could still lie about the time.
This wouldn't serve as, say, a notarized time/date/signature
Teresa
==========
>The best way to do this is with digital signatures. If you include the
>timestamp
>in the body of the message, and then sign the body of the message, there can
>be no doubt about the time (unless you have a weak key-length, or your key
>has been compromised). PGP/PEM will do this.
> There can be no doubt. Use the largest key you can.
>
>--
>____________________________________________________________________________
>Doug Hughes Engineering Network Services
>System/Net Admin Auburn University
> doug@eng.auburn.edu
> Pro is to Con as progress is to congress
