3 ms·
Right, you'd need something like the blockchain - ie, a timestamping server - to validate the posting date. But then you don't need a signature, just a hash. Th
by icebraining 8y ago
Right, you'd need something like the blockchain - ie, a timestamping server - to validate the posting date. But then you don't need a signature, just a hash. The advantage of using Google's timestamping service is that it wouldn't need to store the hash/signature, unlike the blockchain.
- Boulth 8y agoNo, you don't need blockchain for that, just a good old RFC 3161 timestamping server, most big CAs run one and timestamp stuff for free. Actually secure timestamping is already used by Windows to verify software signatures, even when the signing key expires: https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/47289/how-is-an-authenticode-timestamp-verified https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/47289/how-is-an... Heck, you can even use Roughtime [0] to achieve secure timestamping as it uses digital signatures and allows you to provide a nonce. Even the design doc [1] mentions this use case: > This means that Roughtime replies can be used as a time-stamping service, and thus that Roughtime servers can be used to check each other. [0]: https://blog.cloudflare.com/roughtime/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/roughtime/ [1]: https://roughtime.googlesource.com/roughtime https://roughtime.googlesource.com/roughtime
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]