> Personally I think that should be inherently obvious and has always been one > of the arrogances of Systems Admins as a whole - "the how dare you our word" > mindset, and I am sorry - it just doesn't wash anymore. But it currently does. They're called expert witnesses. I followed the procedure. I can testify to the relative accuracy of my clock. Etc etc. I just don't believe in the myth of a digitally signed timestamp solving the world's digital evidentiary ills. It just makes the TSP a source of attack in court. Which means that I as defendant must get some liability assumption from you as TSP if I'm going to rely on you more than on my own staff, policy, and procedures. > This is just my opinion of course but I am willing to lay wager on it. I'd love to hearing of a liabilty-bearing TSP, which would make my viewpoint wrong. /r$ -- Zolera Systems, Securing web services (XML, SOAP, Signatures, Encryption) http://www.zolera.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: loganalysis-unsubscribeat_private For additional commands, e-mail: loganalysis-helpat_private
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Oct 28 2001 - 08:23:04 PST