Alternate proposal for digital signatures

[Steve Allen]

On Tue 2008-03-18T20:49:50 -0700, Bob Denny hath writ:
> Understood. But I still have a hard time with the publisher altering the
> content, and I don't see that in your use-case. The tool could (should!) produce
> a signed packet, thus the author would know that those computer guys can't
> possible alter his/her data.

"a difference which makes no difference is no difference"
		-- William James

XML has a different, and far more complex, notion of difference, or
rather, a far broader notion of sameness, than other media.

> I think we need to get something out there, start using it, learn from it, and
> get focus. The very last thing that should come out of that process is the
> ultimate solution, the standard. So I think we're on the same beam there...

Alternatively, admit that the notion of message integrity is
irrelevant, uninteresting, or unmotivating, perhaps as a result of
specifying the use of already-secure communications channels.

Where does the complexity go, if anywhere at all?

--
Steve Allen                 <sla at ucolick.org>                WGS-84 (GPS)
UCO/Lick Observatory        Natural Sciences II, Room 165    Lat  +36.99855
University of California    Voice: +1 831 459 3046           Lng -122.06015
Santa Cruz, CA 95064        http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/     Hgt +250 m