On May 7, 2011, at 5:49 PM, MFPA wrote: > On Saturday 7 May 2011 at 10:21:17 PM, in > <mid:banlktinacqcd+mz7fl1thlk55x2+u9g...@mail.gmail.com>, Jerome Baum > wrote: > > >> On digital signatures being legally binding, apparently >> a scanned bitmap of your signature is enough to be >> "binding" (as would be no signature), just that it >> isn't very strong documentation. > > What is to stop that scanned bitmap of a person's signature being > applied to a document the individual has no knowledge about?
Nothing more than would stop someone from cutting and pasting (in the old scissors-and-paste sense of the term) a signature from one document to another, then copying the whole thing to make it look right. It's just easier and looks better with a graphics program than with scissors and glue. Incidentally, speaking of bitmap signatures - a "signature" made via a rubber stamp of a signature can be binding under certain circumstances as well (at least in the US - I don't know about elsewhere). David _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
