On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 11:13 -0600, wrote:
> "Andreas J. Guelzow" <> wrote on 04/30/2010
> 12:53:47 PM:
>
> >
> > Re: [office] RE: Part 3 CD01 7.2.1 PD1.4 Forbids encryption of
> signatures
> >
> > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 10:34 -0600, wrote:
> > > It is just defining
> > > the behavior for the real-world complexity that already exists. You
> can
> > > receive an encrypted documented and then want to sign it.
> >
> > Why would you want to sign an encrypted document?
> >
> > Andreas
>
>
> It depends on the context. In some cases signing indicates authorship. I
> sign what I wrote. In other cases signing denotes approval. I reviewed
> the document and I sign it to indicate that I approve it. Whether or not
> it is also encrypted is an orthogonal question. Certainly I wouldn't want
> to sign something I cannot also decrypt. But I might want to sign
> something that only a small number of people can read, like a private
> contract.
As I sign something I should have been able to encrypt it. So it would
be reasonable for me to sign it before I encrypt it, since this shows
that I in fact was able to know what I was signing. If I get an
encrypted and later signed document, I would assume that the signature
was added only to confirm encryption???
Andreas
