pem-dev
[Top] [All Lists]

Signatures yet again

1993-08-11 15:10:00
Bob> What they could do, I feel, is to publish the equivalent of a Legal
Notice that states what the users collective expectations and
understanding of their liabilities might be.  This would merely be a
convenience for the users, in order to avoid having to post such a
notice for themselves.  I view this as the equivalent of printing a
statement on my company's checks to the effect that two signatures are
required for amounts in excess of $xxxx.

This is not so for the reason that the CA policy statement is not
necessarily included in the message unless explicitly referenced.  The
statement about two signatures is explicitly included on the check face,
which makes it a part of the signed message itself.  If the user wishes
to limit the liability of a message, she must do that in the message
itself.

Your later statement about the message being your personal opinion is
clearly a limitation that you and everybody who reads the message can
understand.  Perhaps what you want is a mail package that adds boiler
plate to the message.  It would be convenient if there were a place for
this in the header, although as Steve C.  points out, the header is not
protected.

Peace ..Tom Jones

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Signatures yet again, TCJones <=