- From: Bugbee, Larry <Larry.Bugbee@PSS.Boeing.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 17:46:16 -0700
- To: "'reagle@w3.org'" <reagle@w3.org>
- Cc: "'w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org'" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
> Joseph et al, > > To programmatically process a "digital" signature, I'd need to have the signature and information that would allow me to verify it (cert, CA, algorithm, public key, etc.). Cool. But if I programmatically encounter an "electronic" signature, I at least need to know that fact. ...that it is a signature and not something else. > > Verification may be difficult, the burden of proof rests with the relying party, and all that, but I would need to know that the blob I'm dealing with is indeed a signature. The type of electronic signature could start another interesting discussion, but for now I'd settle for the fact that it is an electronic signature of some type. > <new para> And given that an electronic signature is still a signature, it should enjoy all the rights and benefits of other signatures. ...albeit it is not cryptographically strong and verification is difficult. </new para> > Do you think the wording in sections 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3B sufficiently captures that notion? I'm not sure. > > tx, > > Larry > > Re: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xmldsig-requirements-00.txt > > >
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 1999 20:46:21 UTC