Why Mosaic (SMTP Id#: 50843) -Reply

Tue, 4 Apr 95 04:00:56 PDT

Robert Robbins <rrobbins@gdb.org> wrote:

| In a discussion about security issues associated with executing code or
| binaries obtained over the net,

| On Mon, 3 Apr 1995, Dan Connolly wrote:
| > The right answer is digitally signed distributions. Then only can
| > you be certain that the bits have not changed since they left
| > the author's hands.
| Doesn't this suggest some utility in extending the URN/URL concept to
| include an optional computed checksum as part of the identifier? Verifying
| perfect identity of what you are getting against what you thought you were
| requesting has some value for materials other than programs, too.
| The checksum could be recomputed dynamically every time the file is
| transferred (as checksums are now computed dynamically every time an IP
| packet is placed on or taken from a communication medium).

My initial reaction is it makes more sense for a new document type:
The viewers for signed-html then worry about authentuicating the signature and
displaying proper messages etc.
I dont think a checksum is part of either a name (URN) or a location (URL).

- Jon

PS Any citations, references or pointers to integrating security in
programming languages appreciated. :-)

I am a postgraduate student on a scholarship not an employee of Microsoft ...
I think my thoughts are my own and I believe my writings are too.