Re: Definition of technical non-repudiation, was Re: NR -- what the real issues are, and a proposal

["Aram Perez" <aram@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Ed,

[snip]
> 
> In a purely technical way, I agree with the definition of Menezes et al.
> in the HAC and I recently quoted it in an email to this WG [snipped]:
>
> begin quote----------------------------------------------------------
> Subject:  Re: Is this non-repudiation or NR, and why?
> Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 16:52:42 -0700
> From:  Ed Gerck <egerck@nma.com>
> ...
>
> To contrast, compare with Menezes et al., in HAC, page 3:
>
> "non-repudiation: preventing the denial of previous commitments or actions"
>
> which is both legally and technically possible (as a function of how it
> is done) and is in accord with the name -- non-repudiation. Note that
> there is no mention of intent.
> ....
> end quote------------------------------------------------------------

I have problems with "preventing the denial". You can not prevent me from
denying anything. All you can do is disprove my denial. So I don't think
this is a definition of "technical non-repudiation".

[snip]

Regards,
Aram Perez