[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Secure ???? over the Internet
At 06:50 AM 5/21/96 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>At 11:08 PM 5/20/96 -0700, Mats Jansson wrote:
>>What more beyond an e-mail address would you need in the scenario we are
>>about (EDI over SMTP)?
>WAKE UP CALL # 1
>First of all, our industry may very well NOT USE SMTP, but rather HTTP!
You mean SSL, or SHTTP, or both? Does not really matter. I think you could
be correct for something like "NEW-EDI", but I do believe that "trad-EDI"
users will migrate to Internet EDI via SMTP/MIME (S-MIME or PGP or MOSS
,etc) as a natural extension of the "store-and-forward" EDI messaging
systems they now have in place.
>WAKE UP CALL # 2
>Secondly in a message queing EDI network like the one you are proposing
>based on SMTP, the identifier may well be the trading partner # which might
>be the ISO ASN.1 WTO code, much like what STEP has decided to use. It
>brakes down a lot of international barriers.
It may just be too early (no coffee yet - yes I am a caffeine addict), but
could you point me to info on STEP? I am unfamiliar with STEP, or at least
that part of my brain that is familiar with it is not awake yet.
There is no reason to expect that the signature has any relationship with
>the mail header. This is part of the reason why I have argued with the
>S/MIME people that the signature must be hidable in the secure envelope.
>Which they cannot do.
Just curious -- what is the advantage of hiding the signature/ what are the
problems with it not being hidden.
| David Darnell
| SysTrends, Inc.
| Arizona EC/EDI Roundtable
| 1850 East Carver Road
| Tempe, AZ 85284
| Tel (602)838-5316
| Fax (602)897-8032