[148282] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] Explaining PK to grandma
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Kristian_Gj=F8steen)
Tue Nov 26 17:37:49 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kristian_Gj=F8steen?= <kristian.gjosteen@math.ntnu.no>
In-Reply-To: <D908D9C4-7E19-4A24-A6A5-4395A25EF4F3@callas.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 21:36:21 +0100
To: Jon Callas <jon@callas.org>
Cc: Cryptography Mailing List <cryptography@metzdowd.com>
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
26. nov. 2013 kl. 17:46 skrev Jon Callas <jon@callas.org>:
> On Nov 26, 2013, at 6:15 AM, Kelly John Rose <iam@kjro.se> wrote:
> =
>> =
>> The missing piece here is you can copy such a signature with a good forg=
er. Public key makes it so copying a signature requires something more. =
>> =
>> I think signature is a misnomer in this circumstance. =
> =
> Yes, "signature" is an unfortunate term. "Seal" would have been better.
I like seal. The seal is a thing clearly separate from you, just as the sig=
ning key is not inside your head.
Cryptographic signatures can be considered impossible-to-forge seals.
This makes it meaningful to talk about someone stealing, copying or misusin=
g the seal (the signing key). You can even reason about placing your seal i=
nto a trusted locker in your local bank (your bank stores your signing key =
for you) or giving it to your secretary along with the authority to use the=
seal whenever you tell him to (inserting your smart card into your compute=
r). Now you can explain all kinds of interesting trust situations in an int=
uitive way.
I like seal.
-- =
Kristian Gj=F8steen
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
