Re: on the term `signature'

[owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen Rowley)]

 > From: rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray)

 > L. Detweiler () writes:
 > > Consider the term `signature' in the conventional connotation of a
 > > handwritten scrawl. What are the *critical* properties of a handwritten
 > > signature of a person [x]?
 > > 
 > > 1) no person [y] can `forge' the signature of [x]
 > > 2) the signature of [x] is unique to [x]
 
 >    Well (2) is untrue since I know people who can forge signatures with
 > great precision (even my own).

However if they forged your name on one of your checks, you wouldn't
take such a blase attitude to it would you?

And in such a case you have an opprtunitty to prosecute them for
their criminal act of forgery should you be able tpo prove it.

Digital signature systems need to include the ability to track and
succesfully prosecute criminal
forgery, or digital signatures are worthless for transactiuons
that require reliable accountability.
IMNSHO
 
 >    Since we're going for an ideal Brave New Cyberspace where forging
 > ids is impossible, I've got some suggestions. These should make you very
 > happy:
 > 
 >  1) Phase out handwritten signatures in society and switch to finger prints,
 > retinal scan, and DNA codes. Whenever you sign anything, the store/business/
 > govt office will require a blood test (for DNA), retina scan, and finger
 > print. With today's technologies, these can be made painless and quick.
 > 
 >  2) Require everyone to have a global positioning tracker installed under the
 > skin so they are "accountable" at all times. This worked great in
 > demolition man.
 > 
 >  3) Mandatory caller-id, video-id for everyone. No one should be able to
 > make calls without the other person knowing who you really are. Payphones
 > should have finger print/retinal scanners for verification.
 > 
 >  4) all new computers should come equipped with finger print recognizing
 > keyboards. No more spoofed messages posted on people who leave their terminals
 > accidently logged in (in the computer lab)
 > 
 >  5) get rid of cash! we can't have unaccountable transactions taking place
 > in the economy. Banish the free market. Nationalize all businesses under
 > NSA control.


What makes you think that the bleak vision of the future reflected in your
satire above isn't exactly what the typical power/control-freak government
types want to impose?

 
 > > If a person cannot be traced based on their digital signatures, where
 > > is the accountability? What if a person signs a document with a
 > > `digital signature' and *breaks* that contract? you have no recourse
 > > unless the identity is ultimately identifiable and you can take `that
 > > body' to court.
 
 >    Get a clue for god's sake. Digital signatures won't exist in a vacuum.
 > No one is going to accept the validity of a signature unless it is signed by
 > some trusted/certified authority and that authority would be liable for the
 > person's true name or actions.

right, so where are the systems that certify trust and authenticity?
and who is designing them ,
and what are the design criterea,
and what happens if the government decides they don't want to,
and.....

 LUX ./. owen