Problem with faked-system-time option

[MFPA]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hi


On Tuesday 14 June 2011 at 11:28:11 PM, in
<mid:7eea2c792297b31b4e6448b8b88a9eb3 at localhost>, Robert J. Hansen
wrote:


> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:19:24 +0200, Jerome Baum
> <jerome at jeromebaum.com> wrote:
>> Not really, without any context. Nobody has to prove anything without
>> that context.

> This is also handwaving the bit about how we have
> extremely effective social tools for determining how to
> handle contested signatures: namely, court proceedings.
> This isn't a technological problem so much as a social
> one, and modern democracies have developed robust
> social tools to address it.

Court proceedings tend to require evidence. The use of a timestamping
service could provide this.



> A good rule of thumb is to let technology do what it's
> good at, and society do what it's good at, and not
> expect either to do the other one's work.  :)

Given that technology is required to produce an OpenPGP signature, it
seems reasonable (to me) to suggest using technology to provide a
verifiable time period for when that signature was made. Technology
can be a tool to assist society in its work.

- --
Best regards

MFPA                    mailto:expires2011 at ymail.com

Is it possible to be a closet claustrophobic?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQE7BAEBCgClBQJN+RIYnhSAAAAAAEAAVXNpZ25pbmdfa2V5X0lEIHNpZ25pbmdf
a2V5X0ZpbmdlcnByaW50IEAgIE1hc3Rlcl9rZXlfRmluZ2VycHJpbnQgQThBOTBC
OEVBRDBDNkU2OSBCQTIzOUI0NjgxRjFFRjk1MThFNkJENDY0NDdFQ0EwMyBAIEJB
MjM5QjQ2ODFGMUVGOTUxOEU2QkQ0NjQ0N0VDQTAzAAoJEKipC46tDG5p80cEAMUj
u0/Upk+2W1f7qlMHTdh7w1vZh64HBrX42WFlqu1pWHn7deDRRimsK6c4cj42drMU
TmnUKXCymeoKP4nnee2OFDgF0ECTfxIcznlGTd6Ridrq11mDbPdfdHwyp0wh2ZXI
LqCHb8jMfYIVM4MstzTe2oQ4o22jb5DNcBMepryg
=Jyrk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----