[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [legalxml-enotary] Example - Authenticating Request For Service
[Pieter Kasselman] > Now, at (what I call) the technical level, certificates that conform > to X.509 tend to interop without a problem, regardless of CPS/PS. At the > CPS/PS level it is invariably a business decision as to whether certificates > are accepted. Two organisations may have completely different views on this. > Organisation A will be happy to accept certificates issued under different > CPS/PS, while Organisation B may refuse to do so. This often has more to do > with business practices and philosophy than technical standards or even > security. I would be surprised if it is different in the e-Notary case. [John Messing] But on the other hand, where cross-certification is involved, certificates may not interoperate, according to my understanding and experience, where the CP/CPS' upon which they are based, differ, even with the same hardware and software configurations. I thought that was the lesson of the Federal Bridge Authority. Am I mistaken? [Pieter Kasselman] > So you are proposing that this TC defines the requirements by > which any e-notary process is judged, rather than specifying what an > e-notarized document looks like or how that document is generated and > processed (processed in the machine sense as opposed to the processes > surrounding the practices of the e-notary)? > [John Messing] I believe that is correct, where an e-Notary process may involve totally machine processes as well as mixed human and machine processes.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC