- From: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 15:24:47 -0400
- To: Carolyn Sleeth <csleeth@bic.sri.com>
- cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
I would agree that if you had two dedicated trusted machines in a trusted environment commnicating only with each other, you probably don't need signatures. Donald From: Carolyn Sleeth <csleeth@bic.sri.com> Message-ID: <3B27B06F.7C88AA2A@bic.sri.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 11:27:00 -0700 To: Donald Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>, w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org, reagle@w3.org References: <3B266A96.C7DB9A72@torque.pothole.com> >Hi all- > >I am new to the xmldigsig list and have a question. I noted on the >XML-Signature site that the working group does not deal with broader XML >security issues, so if you could point me to the right person to ask, I >am grateful. > >I am interested in knowing why digital signatures or a third party >digital certificate is at all necessary in transactions where trusted >relationships and identities already exist. An example is a one to one, >long-term relationship in a closed market place. Specifically, when >machine are communicating with other machines (such as in a >time-critical factory floor environment), wouldn't the encumbering >process of digital signatures and verification of information be a >hassle? Do you need a trusted third party to ensure security is machine >to machine interactions? > >I would appreciate knowing what groups do look as questions of trust >management systems. > >Thank you, Carolyn Sleeth
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2001 15:25:49 UTC