"Peter Lebbing" wrote:
> On 04/10/15 17:04, joe.asmod...@sigaint.org wrote:
>> Therefore, I agree that a blanket holding that all digital
>> signatures are non-repudiable is unlikely.
>
> I think you're moving the goal posts. I think Rob says that he's unaware
> of any
> case where a specific digi
"Robert J. Hansen" wrote:
> Yes, many! Digital signatures are enforceable in U.S. courts.
>
> Non-repudiability, though, as far as I know has never been successfully
> argued. More to the point, I don't think it could be.
I assume that enforcebility is determined using the standards applied to
"Robert J. Hansen" wrote:
> The idea that OpenPGP signatures are non-repudiable is a fashionable bit
> of nonsense: I am aware of no court, anywhere in the world, which has
> recognized OpenPGP signatures as being non-repudiable.
>
Are you aware of a court, anywhere in the world, which has consid
