Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Encryption Security

German Government Introduces Digital Signatures 210

Posted by timothy from the weakest-link dept.
bertvl writes: "From this article on CNN: Germany's federal government is introducing electronic signatures for its employees, a step it hopes will help make the security procedure generally accepted in the country. More than 200,000 employees of ministries and agencies will be able to sign electronic documents using a chip card with an encrypted key, giving them the same legal weight as paper documents with a handwritten signature, the federal Cabinet said in a statement Thursday."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

German Government Introduces Digital Signatures More

German Government Introduces Digital Signatures

Comments Filter:

  • more secure (Score:1, Insightful)

    by awing0 ( 545366 )
    This is definately more secure than any paper signature. Of course, both can be duplicated perfectly, the digital sig being a lot harder (depending on the key strength).

    • The flaw in all security systems ... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Big Dogs Cock ( 539391 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @03:41AM (#2880973) Homepage Journal
      ... is people. How many people are going to go for a dump, leaving their keycard on their desk? Practically everyone where I work wanders off at some point leaving their PC logged with their (Notes) mail running. This could lead to hours of fun. Similarly, passwords/phrases get shared, borrowed etc.

      Unless you use biometrics (I don't generally leave my fingers on my desk when I go to lunch), the stupid-factor will always play a part. The legal status of digital signatures will only really be clarified when the first case comes to court with the defense: "someone else must have used my key".

      (OT) Oh, and would people please learn to spell "definite". It's like "finite" with a "de" on the front (quickly checks for typos).
      • Very true...but look at it like this. How many people leave their credit cards sitting around? If it's just a card, it could fit easily into a wallet.
        • More then you'd think. Credit card fraud is still a major problem, and you're giving people yet another plastic card to lose, misplace, what have you. Even the scams that shouldn't work anymore because they're so old still work on occassion, like writing a credit card company and telling them you moved and lost your card during the trip. 99.99% of the time, they won't fall for it, but all you need is that one time.

          And how easily are wallets lost or stolen? God help you if you get mugged...

          Kierthos

      • I don't generally leave my fingers on my desk when I go to lunch

        But you leave your fingerprints on your desk, on your fork at lunch, on your car...

        Even more important (because it's not necessarily possible to fool a fingerprint scanner with the data provided by a print) if fingerprints were a part of day-to-day electronic security, you'd be accustomed to planting your finger on scanners twenty times per day. It only takes one bogus scanner, or even one legitimate scanner that is poorly implemented, and your security is history.


        • It only takes one bogus scanner, or even one legitimate scanner that is poorly implemented, and your security is history.

          For sure.

          That's the part that's always bothered me about even the seemingly super secure authentication based on biometric data combined with some piece of data from your memory.

          The only remedy to this (and, again, it's not foolproof) that I see is to make devices accountable for at least as strong authentication as the people, from the backbone routers all the way down to the devices on the furthest edge.

          I think it's technically possible to get the devices mutually authenticated to the degree where social engineering is the weakest link in the web of trust.

          • The cost of such a maximal-security-at-every step approach would be astronomical.

            It's just as good and much more cost-effective to rely on end-to-end security for authentication and privacy and to leave the network as a simple transport mechansim, IMNSHO.

      • Unless you use biometrics (I don't generally leave my fingers on my desk when I go to lunch), the stupid-factor will always play a part.

        You may not leave your fingers, but you leave a hell of a lot of fingerprints. Fingerprints are easy to gather. Retina scans are much harder but do not adress other issues of using biometric data for authentication.

        You cannot trust biometric data to be secret. You can't use it to replace passwords because you can't chage it and I'm afraid people put too much value on biometric data.

        To me the distinction between "something you have", "something you know" and "something you are" has always been vague. In most practical places they can be reduced to eachother. A hand can be replaicated artificially (are->have). A onetime password system kan be described in terms of an initial vector (have->known). A password you can write down (know->have). Etc.

      • People can learn (Score:2, Informative)

        by Jaborandy ( 96182 )
        I am required by my employer to wear my ID badge so it is visible at all times. I have to scan it to gain entrance to my building, and it is occasionally visually inspected on top of that. To make this process simple, almost all of us wear our IDs on retractor clips on our belts.

        My ID badge also has a smart-card chip in it. I put in the reader on my desk, enter my PIN, and log into the computer/network. I am required to lock my workstation when I leave my desk even momentarily, and auto-lock behavior is enforced if I forget. I can be fired if I am caught cheating on these security practices. Turst me, that's motivation to do things right.

        People can learn anything if it's in their best interests to do so.

        --Jaborandy

    • Re:more secure (Score:2, Insightful)

      by TicTacTux ( 99149 )
      Well, it is just as secure as the underlying application. You might need both the key card plus a SecurID card that generates a one-time pad every minute.

      With t-online's [amongst others'] questionable security record combined with the inherent strong security of a mainstream PC operating system (fail to remember its name) I give the system two months until 1st crack.

      Then again, what's a fake sig under a decrete limiting the maximum parking time to two hours in some suburban street compared to a DoS attack against the root name servers...

    • Paper easily collects fingerprints and body fluids. You may not be able to perfectly verify that signature, but you should be able to verify whether or not someone actually held the paper.

      Keycards are great, but only if used in conjunction with biometrics.

      • One, I don't want to know what fluids you're leaving on documents around your office.
        Two, have you ever seen how many people handle some documents?
        Three, depending on the type of paper, fingerprints may or may not show up better.
        Four, like anyone wants to do a compartive DNA scan, even if it would work on something like finger oils, or a fingerprint match just to determine if they sent a document?

        Kierthos
    • It is not very secure in that you can loose your card with the smart chip on it.
    • To believe that you're signing the document on screen, you have to trust every element of hardware and software between the screen and the card (at least). All an attacker needs to do is to introduce a suitable trojan/virus on the computer holding the document - probably a PC, probably running windows - and when you try to sign something, replace your doc with one of their choosing. For a system that doesn't demand password entry for each crypto operation - and that can drive users nuts - the attacker can get both the real and other document(s) signed, making it hard to notice.

      You can have the most tamperproof card and break-proof algorithm you please, but if you plug it into a standard PC, you are open to all the attacks we hear about every day ...
  • Oh, that's nice. Now, instead of having to pay the government to make laws I like, I can just pay someone to crack their digital signature.

  • A technically savvy government? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Sobrique ( 543255 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @03:37AM (#2880961) Homepage
    Ok, so what's the betting that these 'chip card signers' get used as coffee mats by 95% of of the people who they've been given to? :)

  • We already have it in Belgium (Score:4, Interesting)

    by arnwald ( 468380 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @03:40AM (#2880968) Homepage
    Just last week I set up my life insurance,
    and they used the chip in my bank card as a digital signature (together with the code).

    The nice lady all explained me on how the Belgian State now accepts these digital signatures and how great that was.

    Mind you, that I reside in a farmer community, I wonder how the farmers react ?

    Greetings.

  • That's final proof.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Rob Kaper ( 5960 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @03:41AM (#2880970) Homepage
    The German government just get it. First they send 52-page colour booklets promoting open source to all businesses in the country, then they give a large sum of money to add more security and encryption in mutt and KMail [kde.org], and now this!

  • Correction to CNN (bad coding) (Score:3, Offtopic)

    by bildstorm ( 129924 ) <peter...buchy@@@shh...fi> on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @03:42AM (#2880974) Homepage Journal

    CNN incorrectly reported the prices as yen. The should be Euro

    Not ¥ but €

    I bet lots of Japanese wish that ¥60 was close to $53....

    (This is just like the use of duel instead of dual, when they asked Nicole Kidman about her dual citizenship. CNN has really gone downhill.)

  • Germany (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Supa Mentat ( 415750 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @03:44AM (#2880982)
    You know Germany seems to be one of the technological world leaders. They just decided to phase out all nuclear power in favor of wind power by the year's end and it looks like they'll do it. The acceptance of digital signitures is a huge step in helping the internet reach its full potential for changing the way we live our lives. Germany is taking this first step. What I want to know is: who are the politicians making all of these progressive decisions and what affect are they having in the EU Parliament? Are other European countries following Germany's lead in these type of issues? I know that German business law strongly favors big business, are there any other laws or policy that a liberal would take issue with in Germany? What is the state of Linux use in Germany? I ask all this because I'm looking at an offer for a research position at the Max Planck Institute in Munich (I'm sorry _Munchen_:).

    • Re:Germany (Score:2, Informative)

      by Supa Mentat ( 415750 )
      I'm sorry, looks like Belgium was first with the digital signiture being leagal. My mistake.

      • Re:Germany (Score:3, Informative)

        by Gerein ( 169540 )
        Not that I would agree with your generally praise of germany (although it sounds good :-)), but in this point you were right. Germany passed digital signature laws in 1997 already, being the first state in the world to do so.
    • What I want to know is: who are the politicians making all of these progressive decisions and what affect are they having in the EU Parliament? Are other European countries following Germany's lead in these type of issues?
      The unsatisfactory answer is sometimes. Sometimes you get progressive politicians (from a variety of countries) pushing useful policies, but equally you sometimes get clueless politicians pushing rubbish. If you'd like to know more about what the EU is doing with the "information SOciety", try this link [eu.int].

    • Re:Germany / EU Directive (Score:4, Informative)

      by CyberQ ( 304799 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @04:43AM (#2881058)
      It is not really a innovative step by the German government alone. All EU member states have to transform the EU directive on e-commerce into national law. According to the directive the member states have to make sure that most contracts (very few exceptions) can be closed online. The German government just tries to extend this rule to public law.
      • The German government just tries to extend this rule to public law.

        WRONG! Digitial signatures were equal to written ones in Germany long before the EU directive. IIRC germany was actually the first state in the world to pass such laws.

        Who do you think was the strongest supporter of the EU-directive? The german security requirements were actually much harder than those now demanded by the EU. Many big companies, who had already invested in the needed infrastructure (setting up an CA in a secure building, etc.) were pretty much pissed after the laws got relaxed with the EU-directive.

        The new thing now is, that the german government is trying to push the use of digital signatures, because the adoption has been really low.

    • german politicians and laws are equally stupid, trust me. if you coud read the heise.de (c't magazine) newsticker you'll often see that. all the technology thingies are damned staying in the labs and being tested for years and decades. one good thing though: linux ist quite strong here, mostly suse.

      yes i live in germany

    • Re:Germany (Score:5, Informative)

      by Reinout ( 4282 ) <reinout@noSpaM.vanrees.org> on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @05:01AM (#2881081) Homepage

      What I want to know is: [...] What is the state of Linux use in Germany?



      Germany is home to an awful lot of linux development. SuSE is from Germany, as an example. The government is also active, sponsoring the GnuPG pgp-like developement. Top government officials (like "secretary of state") opening the LinuxTag for 2 or 3 years in a row now.



      There's a lot of debate currently on whether the Reichstag (the German parliament) should switch to linux. It's kinda funny, even people from the same party are disagreeing, one proclaiming the gospel of linux, the other (being half sponsored by Redmond) denouncing it as a threath to Germany's software industry as a whole :-)



      The best tip is to look at heise [heise.de]. They also've got english news now. Look at what's going on there. That 'heise' publishes two of Europe's best-regarded computer magazines, one for home-use (c't), one for professional use (iX).



      Reinout

      • Re:Germany (Score:3, Funny)

        by swoswo ( 530057 )
        There's a lot of debate currently on whether the Reichstag (the German parliament) should switch to linux.

        'scuse me, but Reichstag was the name of the German parliament in ancient days. The current parliament is called Bundestag. To make the confusion perfect, the Bundestag is sitting in a building called Reichstagsgebäude (Reichstags Building).
    • A lot of lobbying takes place through:

      http://www.linux-verband.de/ and

      http://fsfeurope.org/

      In comparison to the UK, Germany is way ahead when it comes to Linux in commercial or govermental environments. When quoting for a Free Software solution in Germany you normally don't have to explain the whole 'free as in free speach, not free beer' malaki.

      IBM Germany and SuSE are also very active trying to convince government organisations to employ Free Software where ever they can.

      There is also a big decission coming up whether to use free Software on the backend and / or on desktops for the parliament and its members. If you google for it you should be able to find quite some stuff about it.

      There is one odity. There is one fraction in the EU that promotes the use of FS and in parallel there are initiatives that go against it by trying to intriduce weired patent laws.

      Come to think of it, IMHO France and Germany are Europes biggest promoters for FS in governmental organisations.

      Rgds,
      REB

    • Re:Germany (Score:4, Informative)

      by 4im ( 181450 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @05:27AM (#2881125)

      You know Germany seems to be one of the technological world leaders.

      They're certainly no losers, but the general public's attitude has been rather anti-tech these past years.

      They just decided to phase out all nuclear power in favor of wind power by the year's end and it looks like they'll do it.

      Says who? Never heard about that one. Wouldn't be possible anyway, there's by far not enough wind power available (or to be made available) to come even close to replacing nuclear power, and certainly not by the end of the year. Sure, the green party hates anything that's got "nuclear" in it's name, but that's hardly rational. If I'd got moderator points, I'd have modded you a troll for this point.

      The acceptance of digital signitures is a huge step in helping the internet reach its full potential for changing the way we live our lives. Germany is taking this first step.

      Maybe. It's unfortunate, though, that they chose a system that's already been broken. IIRC they took quite some heat for it from clued guys, but they went ahead anyway.

      What is the state of Linux use in Germany?

      AFAIK, it's one of the highest levels on this planet. SuSE's from Nuernberg, and AFAIK they make more money than Red Hat.

      I ask all this because I'm looking at an offer for a research position at the Max Planck Institute in Munich (I'm sorry _Munchen_:).

      Good luck there.

      • Re:Germany (Score:2, Informative)

        by palmersperry ( 242842 )
        Says who? Never heard about that one. Wouldn't be possible anyway, there's by far not enough wind power available (or to be made available) to come even close to replacing nuclear power, and certainly not by the end of the year.

        Well according to the BBC [bbc.co.uk] the Germans currently get about 3.5% of their power from wind (a 44% increase over the previous year), however (again according to the BBC [bbc.co.uk]) they currently get about 33% of their power from nuclear sources and the last plant won't be turned off for about 32 years ...

      • that they chose a system that's already been broken

        What? What system did they choose? I'd be very surprised if it wasn't RSA. Or did they choose some cards that have poor security? Please elaborate.

    • (I'm sorry _Munchen_:)

      That's München to you, sonny

      If you really don't know your HTML that well, you could get by with Muenchen at a pinch.

    • They just decided to phase out all nuclear power in favor of wind power by the year's end and it looks like they'll do it.

      Not really. The new conservative candidate for the upcoming national election wants to stop this plan and go 180 degrees.

      What is the state of Linux use in Germany?

      Linux itself: Well, folks use it, that's it. There's no "we're Germans, we use Linux" mantra. However, the German government is currently replacing their old Windows NT based computer network and there is heavy lobbying going on by Microsoft Germany to stop them favouring Linux.

  • How can you trust the chip card? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @03:45AM (#2880983)
    The only way to be sure is to raise the hashed message to the proper power modulo p*q in your head.

  • credit authorization? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MiTEG ( 234467 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @03:45AM (#2880984) Homepage Journal
    Here in the U.S., for me anyway, the most common reason for me to have to sign something is when I pay with a credit card, yet when I purchase something online, no signature is required. This could be great if used by e-commerce companies to verify the person making the purchase is indeed who they say they are.

    Slightly off topic, but why are the currencies given in Japanese yen in the article if it is hosted on an American site and about Germany?
    • Even thou something is digital and convenient, doesn't make it better.

      6 out of the 10 local restaurants don't accept check cards, credit cards or checks. Some even have a ATM machine so they don't have to take credit cards. (Nice 1.00-3.50 charge too) My local gas station is 20-35 cents cheaper per gallon, but if you use a credit card or check card they charge you a sur-charge and a use charge.

      I find its quicker, and faster to carry a couple bux, no standing in line to pay with my card, no atm fees, no additional charges.. Convenience makes Banks lots of money. If I pay with cash at the computer store, if I return it I get my cash back, if I pay with credit card, it takes 2-3 days for me to get my money credited.

      -
      I want my M-Life.
    • The EU has stated its intend to proliferate digital signature for promotion of e-commerce. One has to view the step of the german government in this light. Currently there is not a market for digital-signature solutions just because nearly nobody owns a certified key. Chipcards combined with a passphrase have proven to be quite secure since this technology ist used by several banks for couple of years now. Currently documents you receive from the goverment don't carry a signature, at least in the most of the cases. So even a weak signature would add a signifcant amount of security. But we must not be too optimistic. Two years ago they launched a service for filing your tax in an online process. That turned out to be a bad joke. After completing the process you had been able to print a "tax-digest" that was intended to been attached to the usual documents. They just promised that provided this additional work would speed up the processing. Bad news: The converse was true and the service was shut down after few weeks dur to severe security flaws! Euro & Yen: Both Currency-symbols seem to be composed of a "=" sign, maybe the diference is too delicate for the average CNN writer:-)

    • This could be great if used by e-commerce companies to verify the person making the purchase is indeed who they say they are.

      Don't overstate the case. Use of the card doesn't verify that the person holding is "is indeed who they say they are", but only that the card is associated with the persona being claimed. Someone else could be using the card. Cards should require a password before they'll operate, so maybe it means the person using the card has both X's card and X's password, which is good evidence that the person *is* X, but doesn't guarantee it.

      And (to head off the inevitable incorrect followup) replacing the password with a biometric scan wouldn't verify it either.

  • Can be found here. [bmck.com]

  • Legal Weight (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Mike Connell ( 81274 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @03:54AM (#2880997) Homepage
    Surely the 'legal weight' will be determined by the courts: It's only a matter of time before somebody signs something (or appears to), and then denies any involvment. Excuses (true or not) of "My card was stolen", "They made me tell them the key", "I don't know what you're talking about" will presumably be uttered (in german). Cryptogram has covered the problem that "the key isnt the person" in the past.

    If the first 10 cases all end up with courts deicing that there isn't enough evidence that the person did actually "sign" the document, there surely won't be much legal weight? A paper signature means little if there is sufficient doubt about it's authenticity, I dont see how that's going to change here.

    As an aside, I like the last line of the CNN piece:

    Bitkom called instead for a "citizens' card," with chip and electronic signature, for all Germans.

    Yeah Baby! I can't see anything bad happening down that road!

    • Re:Legal Weight (Score:2, Insightful)

      by aCC ( 10513 )
      It's only a matter of time before somebody signs something (or appears to), and then denies any involvment. Excuses (true or not) of "My card was stolen", "They made me tell them the key", "I don't know what you're talking about" will presumably be uttered (in german).

      Hmmm... very strange argument. Why is that different to hand signatures then?

      Same excuses the other way round (and as courts probably here them very often):
      "My signature was faked." (Event though it looks the same)
      "They made me sign it."
      "I don't know what you're talking about."
      uttered in any language.

      It doesn't matter if it was done digital or analog. The legal situation isn't worse. It only got better, because you have more security features. It's quite easy to fake a hand signature, but it's nearly impossible to fake a digital signature...
      • Why is that different to hand signatures then?

        The difference is that if someone swipes your digital card they can make perfect signatures. If someone forges a paper signature it can be analyzed.

        -
  • Its nice to see this happen as a large scale experiment. We'll have to watch to see how the non-geek workers handle it. But, for cost reasons alone, I don't see the US government implementing anything like this on a wide basis for at least 10 years.

    Brian
    • It might happen sooner than you think. Last week they were reporting that the government was moving towards a standardized drivers license. This idea of digital signature could work well in that system. But I agree, the US has been pretty bad with bureacracy..
      • The card itself is simple. It will be much harder for the government to coordinate a reliable infrastructure (databases, card readers, etc). That is why I think we won't be seeing it anytime soon.

        Of course, there are all of the people problems. The system will have to be highly usable. Today, people can't even handle encrypted email (without physical tokens) because it is too hard. I would be much more positive if someone could show me software that put digital signatures/crypto in terms that a regular person could understand. The current GUIs that wrap around PGP/GPG don't cut it because they assume you understand the underlying process.

        Brian

  • fun and games (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Perdo ( 151843 )
    It's all fun and games until someone steals your digital identity. Just ask all the posters who rate an imposter here. Or ask Signal 11 (7608).

    signal ll (150330)
    Signal 69 (159601)
    Signal 11 (160141)
    Signal Eleven 11 (196051)
    Signal 12 (196465)
    Signal seven 11 (196530)
    Signal 1| (196903)
    Signal%2011%20 (198994)
    Signal 13 (199065)
    Signal 10 (199067)
    Signal 14 (199492)
    Signal%2011 (199508)
    Signal l1 (199916)
    Signal 11 on. . (200800)
    nbsp;Signal 11 (200811
    Sìgnal 11 (200815)
    Signal 11_bork2 (202783)
    Sìgnal ll (203092)
    Signal (203244)
    Signal 11_bork1 (203709)
    Signal II (221055)
    Signal 111 (248325)
    Signal 1I (255479)
    Signal Eleven (261043)
    Signal Nine (442438)
    by Signal 11 (200808)
    • You forgot all the "Noise 11" type names too. Quite a few parodies of that guy. (He's on Kuro5hin now, right?)
    • who rate an imposter here

      I don't have an imposter here (that I know of, hehe), but I had one back on MPlayer.

      The imposter was A1see. The MPlayer font for "one" and "lowercase L" were impossible to distinguish. The only way to tell the difference was to copy the text and paste it in another window.

      The imposter was actively trying to make trouble for me. Cursing, lying, starting arguments. Sigh.

      -
    • It's all fun and games until someone steals your digital identity.


      As soon as you notice it, you put that on record, and any signatures done with that key after that date will be considered invalid.

  • Project Ägypten (Free Software Sphinx-Clients) [gnupg.org]:

    The Sphinx project launched by German authorities aims to improve secure email exchange. The projects technological base is the protocol 'TeleTrust e.V. MailTrusT Version 2'. This includes the standards S/MIME, X.509v3 and others.

    Proprietary products are already on the way, but with the project Ägypten there is now also a Free Software solution going to be realized for popular mail user agents (sphinx-enabling KMail and mutt are essential goals).

    The Free Software companies Intevation, g10 Code and Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB are contracted by the German 'Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik (BSI)' to incorporate the Sphinx protocols into Free Software MUAs. Background is to ensure availability of alternatives to proprietary desktops.

  • Interesting illustration . . . (Score:4, Funny)

    by servasius_jr ( 258414 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @04:00AM (#2881008)
    According to the article's illustration, the Germans will digitally sign their names by writing a long, free-floating string of binary in the air with an ordinary pencil. Evidently the technology being used is both more advanced and more bizarre than anything I've ever seen.

  • Thoughts on the perfect ID card.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ShaniaTwain ( 197446 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @04:10AM (#2881024) Homepage
    G'damn, but this is a tough issue (I'm speaking generally here) How do you:

    (1) Insure that no one can fake your identity

    (2) Insure that no one can conglomerate data from your identity

    It seems to me that both (1) and (2) are desireable, yet mutually exlusive. How do you insure anonimity with a definite ID? These two issues have never been smashed together with such power before. Digital technology gives us the possibility for either (1) or (2), but can it ever give us both? Are they mutually exclusive? Is it either anarchy or buttonhole ID facism?

    .. Personaly I would opt for Anarchy for myself, and button-hole facism for everybody else.. (for safety's sake of course).. How 'bout you?
    • The system will have to work on the principle of "good enough."

      People can already fake your paper signature today.

      People already do conglomerate data about you.

      But sometimes the benefit for the masses outweighs the 0.01% that will have a problem.

      Unfortunately, with computer systems like these, if a problem is general, you don't lose 1 person's data, you lose *everybody's* data. That is something the institution offering the service will have to deal with.

      Brian
      • Huh?

        Do you think it truely is only 0.01% that would have a problem with fake sig's / conglomerate data? I'm not talking about the idea of the problem.. I'm talking about the proverbial full mess. Someone fakes your ID.. Someone tracks you through publicly accesible data and makes life 'difficult' for you because they disagree with your stance on such-and-such an issue.. if this happens (OK- granted that is still the idea of the problem) do you really think that only 0.01% of the population would care? Even in the theoretical stage, is it only 0.01% of the population that cares?? Am I realy one of those tinfoil hat wearing paranoid weirdo's that thinks that something is problem regardless of the facts? .. Wait.. Don't answer that.
        • Do you think it truely is only 0.01% that would have a problem with fake sig's / conglomerate data?

          Yes, give or take a few tenths of a percent. ;)

          Why you ask? Because it can already happen today.

          To turn the onus back on you, do you seriously think that a determined person can't make your life difficult based on your online information right now? Just think of those 1-800-search and other people finder services. A stranger will turn over personal[*] information to anyone with $39.95!

          And I also think that when you're talking about people who care, you need to seperate out those who think privacy would be "nice" and those who care enough to do something about the situation.

          Brian
          [*] At least I consider it personal information.

    • The solution is fucking EASY. We were doing it for years. Centuries, in fact.

      Step 1) DON'T participate in digital commerce. (SIMPLE! Use cash.)

      Step 2) Go to a bank teller every time you need to withdraw cash. The tellers will get to know you and your routines. Unless an imposter physically looks and acts just like you, it will be very hard to rip you off through identity fraud.

      Step 3) Quit whining about convenience. Learn how to fucking budget!

      Yeah, I know it's not as easy as all that. The world is being ram-rodded into a currency system which practically requires that you carry a corporate credit card. But that's only because people keep believing in the bullshit being fed to them. They keep eating it up! One of the most frustrating things in the world is to have your life shaped into pain by morons when you know better, and when they keep insisting that you're the foolish one.

      Biometrics = Evil. (If you don't understand why, then sit the fuck down and figure it out!)

      (-Most of the preceding was not directed at the poster. Just venting ire. Sorry.)


      -Fantastic Lad

    • How do you insure anonimity with a definite ID?

      See, if you want to keep something anonymous, you definitely shouldn't sign it.

      Usually you sign something to give more legal weight to e.g. a contract. It's actually a very good idea to know the identity of whom you make business with, especially if it's a contract that you feel requires the extra legal trustworthyness that a signature gives to it.

      Also note that you cannot comglomarate data simply by knowing a name. You can collect e.g. all the purchase data of your customers (if you have their names, e.g. in online or mail order business), but you can also do that without a digital signature. Digital signatures don't give you access to all data the person has ever signed, only to the things he or she has signed and sent to you. But those documents you also have when they're signed on paper.

      I'm not saying this is a non-issue -- digital signatures definitely make tracking easier. But in this case, I'd say the advantages by far outweigh the dangers.

  • What happens if someone steals your card? It is like forging a signature, although harder to deny.

    Wouldn't thumb or retinal scans be more secure (maybe more expensive though?)
    • What happens if someone steals your card? It is like forging a signature, although harder to deny.
      I suppose you'd do the same thing as always -- tell the cops your ID was stolen. The key would then be invalidated and you'd get a new one.

  • A good next step (Score:5, Informative)

    by nsample ( 261457 ) <nsample&stanford,edu> on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @04:32AM (#2881039) Homepage
    Regardless of your views on "net-widening" and "freedom" and "tracking" and the like, this is the next logical step for genuine security.

    Good security should consists of three parts:

    1. Something you have
    2. Something you know
    3. Something you are

    Now it seems the German government has two out of the three (know+have), which is one (or two!) better than most of the world. Now all they need are retinal scanners, and they're set!

    Like I said, it may not be a Good Thing® they end up with, but whatever it is... it's a lot closer to "secure" than anything else.

    • Good security should consists of three parts:...

      The definition of "good" here is very important. "Good" for legal signatures is a much lower standard than "good" for launching nuclear weapons. Signatures have the advantage that there's all kinds of scrutiny that can happen later, to determine if anything shady happened.

      For digital signatures, biometrics are unnecessary, intrusive and don't add as much seucurity as you think they do. For really high-security applications, it's possible to take the steps needed to make biometrics a valuable addition, but this is not the case for consumer applications.

  • Does anyone know how strong the encryption is? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by voronoi++ ( 208553 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @04:32AM (#2881040)
    If the encryption is not strong enough to deter the majority of fraudsters, then I'd steer clear.

    I'd hope they use some kind of pin code in addition to the "chip card". I also hope you can cancel a "chip card" if it gets stolen...
    If someone fraudulently uses your digital signature that better not be binding!

  • So what's the difference with a phisical ID... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by lay ( 519543 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @04:35AM (#2881045) Homepage

    ...after all?

    I know you americans don't have ID cards, but we have them in Portugal and allways had, so we don't tend to consider them as forms of major control, even though they are.

    The point here is that if you loose your wallet and someone gets ahold of your ID card, you can be in a lot of trouble if it gets misused.

    I have heard of stories from people I know that lost their ID and found themselves being chased by stores that claimed people had bought stuff there, paid the first entrance fee and never paid the rest. And that is the least that you can expect, even if you report your ID being missed 5 minutes after you loose it.

    We, at least, don't have that many legal mechanisms to prevent situations like those, but I would bet it's a matter of time until there is a case of stolen digital ID.

    The German government, by giving incentive to open source applications like encription and security are aware of these problems. So if they actualy exist? They existed well before things went digital, so you can expect a few cases of stolen ID before things get smooth.

    Nice move here in Europe, btw. First GEANT, now this, really love the way things are popping up after a lot of foundation work.

    Lay

    Weakly typed languages will bring us armageddon

    • I have heard of stories from people I know that lost their ID...

      The use of a password to activate the card should greatly reduce the incidence of this sort of thing.

      Still, it can and *will* happen, even if less, and while replacing your whole wallet with a single card (the ultimate, if not logical, limit of smart card use) might seem convenient the downside of losing that one card gets to be really, really large.

  • Oh yeah, and there's the European Citizenship! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by lay ( 519543 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @04:47AM (#2881062) Homepage

    So, like all you are aware of, citizens from European countries have phisical and economic mobility troughout the member states. And we have a common currency now too. So, since Belgium already has a system like this too [slashdot.org], the next logical step would be to implement this troughout the whole Europe, which I bet has already been tought.

    Any other European country that has a system like this? What are the chances of all these systems being interchangeable?

    It's nice that a government from another member state can digitaly ID you... isn't it? :-)

    Lay

    Weakly typed languages will bring us armageddon

    • Knowing the Germans they will produce a system that is so Peculiarly German it can not interact with anything else. In most of the rest of Europe where I have been the predominant form of payment is Plastic Credit Cards. In the Scandinavan countries you can even pay (electronically) for a Taxi with a VISA card. Here in Germany Credit cards are little known and frowned upon and only major shopping centers take them. The Germans use Money Cards with chips on them, you stick it into a auomatic bank machine and load the chip with cash, then you better not stick the card in your back trouser pocket. Because if the card gets bent too hard the contacts from the chip in the card to the interface on the card surface can get torn and, say, 200 Euros are trapped on your chipcard and lost.

  • In related news (Score:2, Informative)

    by jsse ( 254124 )
    Hong Kong's Government [info.gov.hk] has implemented PKI infrastructure [info.gov.hk] for digital signature [hongkongpost.gov.hk] for their citizens. However, there has a fundamental fault in the system - not being thoughtful in distributing the root CA. First the root CA is not embedded in the browsers we commonly use, or have a upper root CA, which is included in browser, signed their root CA. They even allow citizen use floppy to transfer the CA issued to computer...hmm....

    Anyway, the technology is mature, the things yet to be done are policy-making and legalese. Nothing is 100% secure, the CA issuer must bare the legal responsibility and liability. I wish they'd one day realize what is the legal implication of such a faulty CA system.
  • I just hope they don't consider it more credible than paper signatures, because it isn't.

    Sure, the math is safe, but the use isn't. When I digitally sign a document, I don't actually do it myself - I ask a device to do that - a device of which, regardless of common beliefs, I have very little control (About as much control as one might have on their employee - you can ask them to do something, and it will usually look as if they did it, but that doesn't imply anything).

  • Why Digital Signatures Are Not Signatures (Score:5, Interesting)

    by fhwang ( 90412 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @06:54AM (#2881232) Homepage
    Damn, I could've sworn it was just yesterday that I posted this article to another discussion here on /.

    Everyone who's praising the German government on being all tech-savvy and forward-thinking and blah-blah-blah should first read Bruce Schneier's thoughts on the subject: Why Digital Signatures Are Not Signatures [counterpane.com].

    In a nutshell, he says this: Cryptography can do quite a bit to guarantee that a given signature came from a given computer. It can do absolutely nothing to guarantee that that signature represents the person it purports to represent. To quote Schneier: "The mathematics of cryptography, no matter how strong, cannot bridge the gap between me and my computer."

    It's all good and well for governments to embrace new technology, but only if they don't cause major fuckups in the process.

    • There's a huge difference once you introduce smart cards.

      A desktop computer is often left unattended, and it's not unreasonable to believe that somebody could gain illicit access to the data and software.

      In contrast, a smart card is designed to be carried on the subject's person, in wallet or purse. With better cards, you can't pull the private key off the card - all crypto is done on the card itself. And even if you steal the card and attempt to disassemble it, they're designed to make such attacks futile.

      If you want to make it even stronger, since there will always be idiots who write their PIN number on the card itself, you can try the experimental systems that mix biometrics and smart cards. The smart card contains the shrouded private key, the biometrics are used to unlock it.
  • I have been thinking of writting about this and today one slashdotters question has prompted me to finally take it up.
    I am doing M.Sc.Information Technology at the Uni of Stuttgart. Its a very good program as it includes technical subjects like IP Networks, Telecomm Networks,Distributed Systems, Mobile Communictions, DSP, Embedded Systems, etc etc as well as non-technical courses such as Law, Business Management, Innovation and Technology Management, etc.
    The whole program is in English!!!! Infact there are many universities here which are offering such programs. for more info this website [geocities.com]. Check out the "free Education" link. Yes, the education is totally free here.
    In our course on Law, there was a very strong emphasis on "Digital Signatures". You can say that it has been taken up consciously on all levels and its not an overnight decision. A long well thought out process.
    Thoughts on One-Way Authentication : As far as i know the E-Card + PIN code combination is the only secure solution, otherwise all one-way authentication schemes can be hacked. I dont about other banks but atleast Deustsche Bank is using a combination of same technique for their internet banking. You have log-in/password to login onto your account, but to make the actual transaction one has to enter a unique id which is sent by DB through regular mail( you get 50 transaction ids ). This is again a hybrid solution.
    Of all the countries, i think, Germany has made the most secure and wise use of technology.

  • Be equally critical of new and old (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Mawbid ( 3993 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @07:32AM (#2881280)
    When evaluating new systems, people tend to be critical, and rightly so; implementing the system is costly, and a lot could go wrong.

    But I feel that often the risks and costs of the old system are not given as much weight.

    Let's take an example. Some years back, an argument raged in my community about a proposed tunnel under a fjord. The tunnel would allow people to get to the other side in 6 minutes instead of following the outline of the fjord for 45 minutes on a narrow, winding, often steep road.

    The risks of the the new system, the tunnel, got a lot of press. We were treated to many horrifying predictions, each fit for a disaster movie. The proponents of the tunnel pointed out that while the road does not make a good disaster movie, people regularly die in car crashes on it.

    My observasion is that this argument got considerably less recognition than it should have if people had viewed the issue rationally.

    In light of this, can we perhaps enrich the discussion on this particular new system (digital signatures) by identifying the risks and costs of the old system (handwritten signatures on paper).

    I can see a few.

    1) Signatures can be forged. It takes talent, skill and effort to do it well, but only rarely do you need to do it well, because the signature is rarely verified by anyone who actually knows how to do it. (It's not always verified at all. I saw a bogus check hanging in a store once, signed Donald Duck or something like that. The clerk had actually accepted this check as payment.)

    2) The piece of paper needs to be in the same place as the signer. This can't always be arranged easily and sometimes people accept the dangerous alternative of doing business with no signature at all (or a weaker version of the digital signature, the pin code).

    3) Handwriting recognition can't be automated (or has the software gotten good enough?), with the same results as in point 2 (think ATMs).

    I'm thinking of things like online shopping and tax returns at the same time here, but to get a clear picture the applications of signatures should probably be categorized. Also note that I haven't decided in favour of digital signatures. I just want to promote this idea of mine that we should give equal weight to the risks and costs of the system already in place as to the risks and costs of the system being proposed.

  • The article is full of misinformation (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Florian Weimer ( 88405 ) <fw@deneb.enyo.de> on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @07:40AM (#2881296) Homepage
    Unfortunately, the article misses the main point: Germany has been trying to build a PKI for governmental use since 1997 or so (when legislation was passed to make documents carrying some types of digital signatures equivalent to paper documents).

    However, the 1997 law features very high requirements for CAs and the actual implementations of digital signing. Partly because of the high security standards (which look good on paper, but fails in practice--a certified solution was successfully attacked by compromising the hosting general purpose computer), and partly because of incompatibilities, acceptance of this type of signatures was extremely low.

    The new digital signature law introduces a new kind of digital signature with lower security standards, and which does not necessarily require additional hardware. Although this is less secure (key theft might be possible), this approach seems to be practical.

    At the same time, the compatibility problems are addressed in the Sphinx framework, where KMail and GnuPG are enhanced so that they can exchange messages with other Sphinx-compatible clients.

    If I'm not mistaken, the German federal government announced recently that it would promote the use of the low security digital signature in non-critical areas of the federal government. I think this is a good idea; even a digital signature based entirely on software (and not on some smart card which fully implements an assymmetric crypto algorithm) provides more authentication than a simple phone call, and certainly much more non-repudiation (even more than an oral consultation). And this time, the rollout might actually succeed, if the clients get ready soon.

  • Forged digital signatures? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rice_burners_suck ( 243660 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2002 @12:45PM (#2882896)

    What about forged signatures?

    xxxxxxxxxx O xxxxxxxxxx H xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx W xxxxxxxxxx E xxxxxxxxxx L xxxxxxxxxx L xxxxxxxxxx.

    Actually, I'm not done yet. I just wanted to say that we're moving towards a moneyless, paperless society. One day, and it might not be so far off in the distant future, there will be no money, and all documents will be electronic and signed with digital signatures. All your personal information will be stored on a so-called "chip card." This will be a sort of global identification card, which will simultaneously serve as:

    • Identification:
      • Birth certificate.
      • Driver license, including complete driving record.
      • Whatever other licenses you might have.
      • Retinal scan, fingerprints, DNA, voice identification, and whatever other methods are invented.
    • Money: (at this point, money will simply be credit)
      • Debit and credit card for all checking, savings and credit accounts that you have.
      • Record of every transaction you make, for tax purposes. (This will be so convenient because you won't have to balance your accounts anymore. It'll be done automatically. Of course, taxes will automatically be deducted from every transaction, so you don't have to worry about that anymore, either.)
    • School:
      • Transcripts for every educational institution you attend.
      • Instructor comments.
      • In fact, every individual grade (for each assignment and test) will be recorded.
      • Attendance record.
    • Medical:
      • Entire medical history.
      • Prescriptions.
      • Allergies.
      • Complete insurance information.
    • Convictions. Need I say more?
    • Global Positioning System:
      • Never get lost again, even if you want to. And of course, everywhere you go, you'll need your card, so you can't just leave it behind.
      • This will be so convenient because if you lose your card, it'll be found very quickly.

    With tiny storage medium such as microdrives reaching capacities of a gigabyte or more, such a card is not far off. It could even come from the government already in a nice waterproof protective wallet. After a few years go by, they'll start implanting this technology in peoples' bodies, and sell you on the added conveniences, such as monitoring of your life functions, the impossibility of getting kidnapped, huge reduction in crimes, etc. That way, Big Brother can really be in control of your life.

    Ok, now I'm done.

    xxxxxxxxxx O xxxxxxxxxx H xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx W xxxxxxxxxx E xxxxxxxxxx L xxxxxxxxxx L xxxxxxxxxx.

Slashdot Top Deals

A fail-safe circuit will destroy others. -- Klipstein

Close