EU Draft Digital Signature Directive

[John Williams]

In article <3.0.32.19980822114103.006962a0@mail.netkonect.co.uk>,
Nicholas Bohm <nbohm@ernest.net> writes
>At 09:49 PM 8/21/1998 +0100, David Swarbrick wrote:
>>In message <199808201737_MC2-56BA-741E@compuserve.com>, Nigel Hickson
>><nigelhickson@compuserve.com> writes
>>>Colleagues 
>>>
>>>Just to confirm (in light of Mr Swarbrick's posting) that legal recognition
>>>will NOT depend on a CA being licensed but only on meeting standards (or by
>>>convincing the judge in other ways). 
>>>
>>I welcome this liberating approach. I almost daredn't ask, but is this
>>the change I think it is to accord with the EU proposal?
>
>More crucially, why should recognition depend on a signature being
>certified by a third party at all?  If you know me, and I give you my
>public key in person, and you rely on my signature made with the
>corresponding private key, why should recognition of that signature be
>denied merely because no third party certified it?
>
>       Regards,
>
>               Nicholas
>
Agreed.  It is surely true for written signatures.  If you know me, and
see me sign a cheque made out to you - then you don't need my signature
witnessed,  or somehow authorised by a notary.  You are simply left
wondering if I have the funds in my bank account.  Even the bank doesn't
ask for a third party certification of my signature.  Why should a
digital signature be any different?

-- 
John Williams
Email: johnwill@bcsphcsg.demon.co.uk
Fax:   01483 440928