On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 03:13, Jerome Baum <jer...@jeromebaum.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 23:56, Robert J. Hansen <r...@sixdemonbag.org>wrote: > >> On 05/07/2011 02:49 PM, MFPA wrote: >> > What is to stop that scanned bitmap of a person's signature being >> > applied to a document the individual has no knowledge about? >> >> Nothing. That's the nature of physical signatures. > > > I was talking about a digital signature though. > > MFPA: I agree about the signature being very weak. I am just repeating what > German law says. This is from some brochure brought out by the BSI. It's > also quite a right interpretation -- they aren't assigning much strength to > it, it's what we have advanced and qualified electronic signatures for. The > bitmap scan is still digital though, and it is a signature. So, it is an > electronic signature. Makes sense, just don't accept it in court. > You realized you might be referring to the "binding" part. As I like to repeat, every statement of intent is binding. Signatures are just a kind of documentation, and as I said, it's not very strong documentation. "I offer you 10 dollars if you give me 10 euros, and this is valid for two days from now." -- that statement of intent is legally binding (or it would be, if I were being serious). You can hold me to that. The problem is, you won't have much evidence I really made that statement and you'd have a hard time dragging me to court for this anyway. That doesn't make the statement less binding. Exceptions are found e.g. for home purchases, which AFAIK over here need to be documented in writing/on paper. -- Jerome Baum tel +49-1578-8434336 email jer...@jeromebaum.com -- PGP: A0E4 B2D4 94E6 20EE 85BA E45B 63E4 2BD8 C58C 753A PGP: 2C23 EBFF DF1A 840D 2351 F5F5 F25B A03F 2152 36DA
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
