On Saturday 15 December 2001 10:17, Douglas Carnall wrote: > As far as I understand it, the design of GNotary addresses the defence > of the integrity of clinical records in the unusual situation where you > have clinicians who are also skilled system administrators, or a > conspiracy between a system administrator and a clinician. > > Having a distributed network of well-administrated peer-to-peer servers > holding GNotary data which can cross-compare data in the event of > attacks on the keys themselves will surely put undetectable > falsification beyond the resources of even the most highly powered > conspiracy?
This is in fact the whole point of the GNotary system. And although I agree that conspiracies or constellations of that kind are rare, I predict that the ALLEGATION of such "conspiracy" (namely a sueing patient claiming that a doctor's health records are not allowed in court as evidence as they MAY have been tampered with) will be less uncommon - in fact I expect such allegations to become common practice once lawyers catch up with modern times and start understanding what can be done with digital documents. As it does not cost you more than maintaining an email account and a few extra megabytes on your harddisk to counteract such allegations, it would be foolish not to do so. Horst
