pem-dev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Nonrepudiation and CA liabilities

1995-10-17 07:10:00
This is exactly what we *don't* need.  Another government bureaucracy to
control CA's and all attendant technologies. :-(

I believe the U.S. Post Office is searching for a purpose in life since
even *they* have figured out they are dead meat within ten years. I'm sure
they would like this scenario.

Risk should be shared amongst those want to be in the market.  I.e Banks,
credit card consortiums and other financial institutions.  Managing CA
risk for financial transactions is not significantly different than for 
mail order credit card transactions.  Why does LL Bean et. al. ship goods 
against unverified credit cards?  Simple.  The risk of credit loss is 
acceptable to them in return for the increased sales volume and therefore
profitability.  Why does the customer, you and me, give out our credit 
card numbers to them? Simple. The bank is limiting our potential losses.
Why does the bank do this? Simple.  It makes them money. 

The same banking regulations we have now regarding capital base etc. are 
sufficient to use in the case of cyberbanking.  We *dont* need another
government agency making these decisions for us.

Regards:
-arc

On Mon, 16 Oct 1995 Jueneman(_at_)gte(_dot_)com wrote:

And finally, and this is where legislation may be in order, we need to have a 
no-fault, safe-haven for CAs that follow all the rules, are licensed and 
audited, etc., to ensure that they are not subject to a ruinous suit brought 
by 
someone who was harmed because a minor human error or statement of fact by 
the 
subscriber.


Bob

Robert R. Jueneman
GTE Laboratories
1-617-466-2820 Office
1-508-264-0485 Telecommuting


Arley Carter
Tradewinds Technologies, Inc.
email: ac(_at_)hawk(_dot_)twinds(_dot_)com
www: http://www.twinds.com

"Trust me. This is a secure product.  I'm from <insert your favorite 
corporation or government agency>."

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>