5 ms·
The essential property of seals is that they are fragile and offer tamper evidence. Removing a seal or opening a sealed document is supposed to be destructive t
by NoSorryCannot 5y ago
The essential property of seals is that they are fragile and offer tamper evidence. Removing a seal or opening a sealed document is supposed to be destructive to the seal, the document, or both. Seals are still used for this purpose.
Electronic signatures don't have this property.
- timwis 5y agoDoh, good point! A stamp of a signature would perhaps be more fitting.
- dredmorbius 5y agoThose would be seals (usually royal seals), in European usage. In Japan, Hanko or Inkan: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seal_(East_Asia)#Japanese_usage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seal_(East_Asia)#Japanese_usag...
- thaumasiotes 5y ago> Those would be seals (usually royal seals), in European usage. Well, the European usage is to call them seals in a European or Near Eastern context. For some reason, exactly the same thing in an Asian context is often called a "chop" in European usage.
- upofadown 5y agoTamper evidence is actually the only thing that cryptographic signatures provide. If either the "document" or signature is modified then verification fails. Cryptographic signatures don't provide evidence that someone looked at the "document" in transit. For that we use a separate sort of thing called encryption and prevent the problem entirely. The two things work together to provide the equivalent of a sealed envelope or securely folded paper document.