1996-06-08 - Re: Electronic Signatures

Header Data

From: Asgaard <asgaard@sos.sll.se>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 42adc0341796813f174fee47b57a9a79abc9e636d828b3bc9f6024027ff79601
Message ID: <Pine.HPP.3.91.960608020153.21836A@cor.sos.sll.se>
Reply To: <19960607141610.13186.qmail@ns.crynwr.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-06-08 04:09:39 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 12:09:39 +0800

Raw message

From: Asgaard <asgaard@sos.sll.se>
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 12:09:39 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Electronic Signatures
In-Reply-To: <19960607141610.13186.qmail@ns.crynwr.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.HPP.3.91.960608020153.21836A@cor.sos.sll.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On 7 Jun 1996 nelson@crynwr.com wrote:

> No, I was responding to the person who was distrustful of the law's
> requirement for certified signatures.  DON'T WAIT FOR THE GUVMINT TO
> CREATE A CERTIFYING AGENCY -- start your own and get some momentum.
> Makes it much harder for them to claim that PGP won't work because

Good advice. And if we are all waiting for our respective Post Offices
to come aboard we'll have to wait for a long time. I don't remember
how many years ago our Post Office was announcing 'real soon now' for
the first time, because so much time has elapsed since then. I guess
such institutions (bye economic capabilities) are mainly hiring cheap
incompetents who will never catch up with the latest developments.

Asgaard





Thread