W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > October to December 1999

AW: Re[2]: Omitting Location and Transforms from SignedInfo

From: Peter Lipp <Peter.Lipp@iaik.at>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 21:59:17 +0100
To: <rhimes@nmcourt.fed.us>, <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, <jboyer@uwi.com>, <gwhitehead@signio.com>, <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
> It really concerns me that there is so little concern about
> locating objects.
I strongly believe don't think finding an object has anything todo with
digital signatures. I am still waiting for somebody giving a real life
example where you have the signature, and the signature only, and go off
searching for the corresponding data. The other way, having the data and
looking for a signature, might be more appropriate, but in that case any
unique id is fine (so I really liked Josephs suggestion to use the hash).

> Is a floating location any better?
One still can use any form of location as a hint or so in any place you
want. But it is not required for solving the signature "problem".

Thank you for your interest into our products!

Peter Lipp
Dr. Peter Lipp
Inffeldgasse 16a, A-8010 Graz, Austria
Tel: +43 316 873 5513
Fax: +43 316 873 5520
Web: www.iaik.at

Received on Wednesday, 17 November 1999 15:59:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:32 UTC