Re: Space stamping protocol

["todd glassey" <todd.glassey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Actually Stephen I disagree. ***You*** may claim that this was done as a
political statement to enable the use of signature verification relative to
a time stamp, but in fact - the only real value that timestamps have is as
an evidentiary marque for after the fact non-repudiation.

There is no other commercial use for them in PKI as the decision support
processes for "is this signature any good" are easier and cleaner to
implement as applications-ware rather than as network component.

Not that timestamps are not important - they are critical, but for audit
based proofing, i.e establishing a document's feature point's in time.

Todd
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Kent" <kent@xxxxxxx>
To: "Eric Norman" <ejnorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <ietf-pkix@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 6:54 PM
Subject: Re: Space stamping protocol


>
> At 3:41 PM -0600 1/23/02, Eric Norman wrote:
> >So, we have a need for time stamping services and the associated
> >protocols.
> >
> >Can we use GPS satellites and receivers to provide a space stamping
> >service?
> >
> >It might be useful for the nuclear launch scenario or alibis.
> >
> >Eric Norman
>
> PKIX adopted a time stamping protocol not because it is an
> infrastructure service in support of non-repudiation, which is a
> common function for PKIs.  A "space stamping" protocol would not seem
> to offer a service which is intrinsically related to PKI, and thus
> would not seem to be a suitable PKIX work item.
>
> Steve