[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The role of trust in certification
At 10:40 AM 3/12/98 -0500, you wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>At 03:30 PM 2/12/98 -0800, Tony Bartoletti wrote:
>>This debate regarding "I use because I trust" vs "I trust because I used" is
>>interesting, but any hopes of resolution can only occur in a theoretical
>>arena.
>
>I wish people would stop using the naked word "trust".
>
>US currency says "In God we trust".
>
>I can't think of any human I trust without qualification. For people, I
>might say the words "I trust her", but I always finish those words with the
>thought "to ________" or "to be __________".
>
>This idea that we can establish trust or communicate it is a sample of
>sloppy speaking, AFAIAC. That's why we didn't call a <tag> "(trust ...)".
>
> - Carl
>
In the context it was written, I belive there was no particular
implication that "absolute" or "unconditional" trust was meant.
The observation was made in response to one of Ed Gerck's statements,
to the effect that a thing cannot be used until trusted. My response
intended to convey the chicken-and-egg nature of trust in the human
experience, how we come to trust one another (to do X, be Y, whatever.)
This is in contrast to purely theoretic or axiomatic treatments,
(at least the simpler ones) where unquestioned trust in some root
premises is assumed, and used to "prove" the trustworthiness of
subsequent "well-formed" contructs. This approach also has value.
___TONY___
Tony Bartoletti LL
SPI-NET GURU LL LL
Computer Security Technology Center LL LL LL
Lawrence Livermore National Lab LL LL LL
PO Box 808, L - 303 LL LL LLLLLLLL
Livermore, CA 94551-9900 LL LLLLLLLL
email: azb@llnl.gov phone: 510-422-3881 LLLLLLLL
Follow-Ups:
References: