EU Draft Digital Signature Directive

[Brian Gladman]

George Foot <georgefoot@oxted.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On Thu 27 Aug, Brian Gladman wrote:
>>
>> But a written signature is no different - it says nothing about the
>> trustworhiness of its owner - so surely the term 'digital signature' is
>> reasonable in this respect?
>
>
>Logical ?  To the specialist YES.

>But what matters in the reaction of ordinary people who have never given
>such matters any thought.  The word "signature" has an aura of
>respectability which is allied in the non-specialist mind to "trust"
>however much this is unjustified.

There is nothing here that is particular to a specialist - this is just
common sense.  If you show anyone a signature of someone they do 
not know and ask them if its owner can be trusted I doubt that they 
would say yes - my guess is that the most likely answer is that they do 
not know.  If on the other hand they recognise the signature as that of a 
colleague they might then give an answer one way or the other.

To suggest that the trust is associated with the signature rather than its
owner defeats the very argument that you are making.

>Why not call this "spade" by its correct name.

Agreed and I am defending the use of the term 'digital signature' as
reasonable.

      Brian