On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 1:36 PM, ianG <iang(_at_)iang(_dot_)org> wrote:
On 29/11/2016 04:25, Peter Gutmann wrote:
see e.g. Steven
Mason's excellent "Electronic Signatures in Law").
Just as an aside, the 100 quid ++ excuse to not read Mason's book is now
gone. The 4th edition is out, it's free online, in a PDF form.
http://ials.sas.ac.uk/digital/humanities-digital-library/obs
erving-law-ials-open-book-service-law/electronic-signatures
http://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001602.html
And you can still purchase the paper versions or Kindle or etc if you're a
lawyer!
Which would appear to remove the argument that we should avoid digital
signatures because they are too difficult. It really isn't that difficult
to see that the digital signature does not make the legal position any
worse than it is with regular email and could if correctly applied make
things a lot better.
What we are really talking about here is not merely the creation of an
autography but the performance of an intentional act of signing.
I don't think that a regular email application or for that matter any
general purpose communication mechanism should be used for that purpose.
Rather, intent to sign should be expressed through a separate application
and a key that is specific for that purpose.
_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list
openpgp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp