IETF-SSH archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: future SFTP version question



Peter Gutmann wrote:
nisse%lysator.liu.se@localhost (=?iso-8859-1?q?Niels_M=F6ller?=) writes:


Then I think the first thing you have to do is to write up the requirements.
"Non-repudiation" is a very fuzzy concept to me, and I'll have a hard time
participating in discussion of details in a non-repudiation mechanism.


It's a fuzzy concept to everyone, so much so that after 20-odd years of trying
the X.509 guys gave up and renamed the nonRepudiation flag in certs to
something that actually had a meaning.  Calling it a "delivery receipt" would
be better, that's what S/MIME (which is the only major standard to
specifically address this) calls it.  In fact you could probably lift a lot of
the S/MIME stuff, since they've looked at it in some detail.

Its actually a concept with a perfectly well-defined meaning in law - which is, it is something that is _defined by law_ to be non-repudiable (i.e. you can deny it, but it doesn't get you anywhere). An example is the UK Customs and Excise electronic VAT returns - they are non-repudiable by statute.

If anyone cares, this whole debate caused me to write a paper about this (and other things) with a lawyer: http://www.apache-ssl.org/tech-legal.pdf

Section 2.7 deals with non-repudiation.

Cheers,

Ben.

--
ApacheCon! 13-17 November! http://www.apachecon.com/

http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html       http://www.thebunker.net/

"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index