|


Invitations
Archives
|
|
|
|
Reader Comments:
PGP Signatures for Electronic Documents?
Re: "Electronic Signature Legislation," (Ubiquity, May 9-15, 2000)
Paul Lane expresses concern about a signed electronic document being altered
without anyone knowing. Even a paper document -- formally notarized -- can
be altered; only after a careful examination would the fraud be detected.
Paper documents are indeed fraudulently signed and notarized, sometimes
throwing the ownership of a home or other real estate into doubt.
For electronic documents, the answer might lie in PGP signatures. Not only
can PGP meet Ephraim Michael's requirements for authentication and
nonrepudiation (if the web of trust described in Phil Zimmermann's writings
is used) as well as Michael's requirement for assent. It can also meet
Lane's requirement for integrity since the signature will fail verification
if the signed file is altered.
For some time now, PGP signatures have been used in the software industry so
that recipients can verify that downloaded critical software is indeed both
authentic (the downloaded version was indeed created by the asserted source)
and unaltered. Web masters sometimes use PGP to sign key Web pages to
facilitate detection of alterations by hackers.
Two years ago, the California Secretary of State established a regulation on
the use of digital signatures on electronic documents submitted by local
governments to the state. (See http://www.ss.ca.gov/digsig/regulations.htm.)
While not explicitly naming PGP, the regulation clearly describes the public
key/private key system that is implemented in PGP. In lieu of the web of
trust, the regulation also allows the alternative of local governments
having their public keys certified by a certificate authority, two of which
have already been approved by the Secretary of State.
Of course, proposed legislation (both in the U.S. and the U.K.) that would
require individuals to give the police their private keys and pass-phrases
would undermine the use of PGP -- or any other dual-key system -- for
acceptable electronic signatures. This is even recognized by the California
Secretary of State, whose regulation requires "the private key used to
create the signature on the document is known only to the signer".
-- David E. Ross
Previous comments on "Electronic Signature Legislation."
There's More Than One Way to Mow the Lawn
Re: "The Humane Interface," (Ubiquity May 23-29, 2000)
The excerpt from the new book on interface design by Jef Raskin does not
take into account a peculiar human behavior that I have observed. Let me use
the example of mowing the lawn or shaving. I will follow the same path many
times in a row and suddenly adopt a new path that I will likewise follow
many times in a row. I for one cherish the ability to accomplish the same
task five different ways in my word processor or my OS. I want five
different paths to take. I will, at one time or another, explore and try to
master each path. I will then use combinations (to my liking) of each. He
states, "When you have to choose among methods, your locus of attention is
drawn from the task and temporarily becomes the decision itself." Is that
supposed to be a bad thing? I plan to learn new ways of living until the day
I die.
-- Gregory A. Moore
|
[Home]
[About Ubiquity]
[The Editors]
Ubiquity welcomes the submissions of articles from everyone interested in the future of information
technology. Everything published in Ubiquity is copyrighted ©2000 by the ACM and the individual authors.
|
|