Re: Personal certs

--001a113fb2fc3ccdb9052a640de4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

No.  Some of the things they do do seem less useful and more expensive.

On Wed, 27 Jan 2016, 18:50 Nicholas Bohm <[email protected]> wrote:

> 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>
>
>

--001a113fb2fc3ccdb9052a640de4
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr">No.=C2=A0 Some of the things they do do seem less useful and=
 more expensive.</p>
<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Wed, 27 Jan 2016, 18:50=
=C2=A0Nicholas Bohm &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]=
t</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin=
:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 27/01/2016 11:5=
5, Graham Cobb wrote:<br>
&gt; On 26/01/16 18:01, Nicholas Bohm wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt; What these bodies can certainly do is assert &quot;There is a soli=
citor<br>
&gt;&gt; [doctor/surgeon/etc] on our register with address [etc].&quot;=C2=
=A0 What they<br>
&gt;&gt; find much harder is to assert &quot;The person you are dealing wit=
h is the<br>
&gt;&gt; same person as the one to whom the foregoing assertion applies.&qu=
ot;<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; They are naturally concerned about the risks of making the first<b=
r>
&gt;&gt; assertion and being understood to have made the second,<br>
&gt; Well, I hope they are all prioritising solving that problem!!=C2=A0 As=
 they<br>
&gt; have a (legally and socially recognised) function to register their<br=
>
&gt; practitioners they need to do it in a way that conveys useful<br>
&gt; information to the consumers of those services.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; As their practitioners move online, and join social networks, the firs=
t<br>
&gt; assertion becomes irrelevant and only the second is useful.=C2=A0 If t=
he<br>
&gt; existing professional bodies can&#39;t solve it, someone else will hav=
e to<br>
&gt; and will assume their powers.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; A professional &quot;register&quot; in this day and age does not list =
names and<br>
&gt; addresses, it lists public signing keys.<br>
<br>
I suspect we may have some way to go before this becomes the norm.<br>
<br>
Do you know of any that do this?<br>
<br>
Nick<br>
--<br>
Contact and PGP key here &lt;<a href=3D"http://www.ernest.net/contact/index=
.htm" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http://www.ernest.net/contact/in=
dex.htm</a>&gt;<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div>

--001a113fb2fc3ccdb9052a640de4--