PKI creed (was Re: Trustworthy contacts)

[Nicholas Bohm]

At 05:14 PM 9/15/2000 +0100, Brian Gladman wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Ben Laurie" <ben@algroup.co.uk>
>To: <ukcrypto@maillist.ox.ac.uk>
>Sent: Friday, September 15, 2000 3:44 PM
>Subject: Re: PKI creed (was Re: Trustworthy contacts)
>
>
>> Paul Leyland wrote:
>> > I think I've made my point now.  Carl is quite correct: a simple list=
 of
>> > names does not make an adequate directory in the modern world.  To be
>useful
>> > and reliable it must also contain, either directly or indirectly, a
>great
>> > deal of contextual information.
>>
>> But what about _my_ point, which is that a registered company
>> name+country of origin is sufficient for unique identification of the
>> company?
>
>I don't know the answer - precisely what is the registration requirment in
>this respect in each country that registers companies?  Are there standards
>for registration that are shared across countries?
>
>In what way do names have to be unique (or is it the name plus some further
>information)?  Is there a precise specification of the rules here (UK)
>and/or elsewhere?

Company names have to be unique within the UK namespace.  (There are also a
number of prohibited names - Red Cross Limited, for example - and
restrictions on names too similar to existing names, although not a lot of
difference is required).  Persons or bodies which are not companies must
not use the word "limited".  There are other namespaces:  friendly
societies, charities, partnerships, unlimited companies, with varying
degrees of cross-checking to ensure uniqueness and varying degrees of
regulation in the event of name conflicts.  Two different people may use
the same business name and even trademark for different categories of
goods, for example.

Although it might be possible to form a company overseas by the same name
as an existing UK company, if the foreign company set up in the UK it could
be required to adopt a distinctive UK name.  But there may be parts of the
world where there is no legal means for preventing name conflict of this
kind within one jurisdiction:  the UK r=E9gime is not that old, and others
may not have followed it.

Most of the certificates I have noticed on websites seem to be certificates
for the website address rather than for the name of the owner, as it
happens.  Is this usual?  It seems to mean that if I want to know who the
owner is, I have to do a further search for the name and address of the
owner of the site identified in the certificate.

Regards,

Nicholas Bohm

Salkyns, Great Canfield,
Takeley, Bishop's Stortford CM22 6SX, UK

Phone		01279 871272	(+44 1279 871272)
Fax		01279 870215	(+44 1279 870215)
Mobile   	07715 419728	(+44 7715 419728)

PGP RSA 1024 bit public key ID: 0x08340015.  Fingerprint:
9E 15 FB 2A 54 96 24 37  98 A2 E0 D1 34 13 48 07
PGP DSS/DH 1024/3072 public key ID: 0x899DD7FF.  Fingerprint:
5248 1320 B42E 84FC 1E8B  A9E6 0912 AE66 899D D7FF