[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: CRLs versus short Validity periods

To: "Robichaux, Paul E" <perobich@ingr.com>, "spki@c2.org" <spki@c2.org>
Subject: RE: CRLs versus short Validity periods
From: frantz@netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 19:29:09 -0800
Cc: "cme@cybercash.com" <cme@cybercash.com>

At  4:33 PM 2/29/96 -0600, Robichaux, Paul E wrote:

>In general I agree with Carl's analysis, but I'm afraid that if you need a 
>CRL to handle these cases you risk splitting certificates into two types: 
>types which have a validity window ("Paul Robichaux is a member of the NRA 
>effective 1/1/97 to 12/31/97") and those which don't. For those which don't, 
>you still need online clearing.

Online clearing creates a privacy problem.  Those who value their privacy
will want to use only time-limited certificates.  I hope we can cater to
their desires.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The CDA means  | Periwinkle  --  Computer Consulting
(408)356-8506     | lost jobs and  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

Prev by Date: Re: going back to stone axes
Next by Date: Re: going back to stone axes
Prev by thread: Re: CRLs versus short Validity periods
Next by thread: Re: CRLs versus short Validity periods
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread