Re: Personal certs
Nicholas Bohm <[email protected]> Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:49:25 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.law.cryptography.uk |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 27/01/2016 11:55, Graham Cobb wrote: > On 26/01/16 18:01, Nicholas Bohm wrote: >> What these bodies can certainly do is assert "There is a solicitor >> [doctor/surgeon/etc] on our register with address [etc]." What they >> find much harder is to assert "The person you are dealing with is the >> same person as the one to whom the foregoing assertion applies." >> >> They are naturally concerned about the risks of making the first >> assertion and being understood to have made the second, > Well, I hope they are all prioritising solving that problem!! As they > have a (legally and socially recognised) function to register their > practitioners they need to do it in a way that conveys useful > information to the consumers of those services. > > As their practitioners move online, and join social networks, the first > assertion becomes irrelevant and only the second is useful. If the > existing professional bodies can't solve it, someone else will have to > and will assume their powers. > > A professional "register" in this day and age does not list names and > addresses, it lists public signing keys. I suspect we may have some way to go before this becomes the norm. Do you know of any that do this? Nick -- Contact and PGP key here <http://www.ernest.net/contact/index.htm>