[pdftex] Re: pdftex-pdfcrypt - The Missing Link(?).

[Michael Chapman]

Firstly thanks to everyone for the debate. My primary intention was to 
advocate incorporation into pdfTex -that was irrelevant within an hour or so 
of my message. I have certainly learnt much from the subsequent comments 
though.

Many of the points have no solution, they are (to quote myself) "balances". 
Is it more over-bearing to presume that people will behave rationally or to 
try and stop them behaving irrationally or to ...... ?


On Thursday 19 April 2001 17:31, Wroth, Mark wrote:
> Encrypting the PDF makes it harder to change the document, but provides no
> way of verifying whether the document is the original.
>
	Agreed, but I (and others will differ) was not purusing absolute 
verifiability. I was happy with a "threshold" that it would be difficult for 
someone to claim to have crossed in good faith.
	After all, 'real' company accounts to members are not 
individually signed, merely printed. One might accidently mis-report what  
they say but one could not accidently (even if, in these day with DTP, 
easily) re-typeset them.


On Thursday 19 April 2001 18:18, Karsten Tinnefeld wrote:
> E.g., you can download "disabled" versions of the German federal law
> proceedings "Bundesgesetzblatt" from
> http://www.bundesanzeiger.de/bgbl1.htm or choose to pay EUR 135 for an
> "enabled" version from the same place.
>
	Which seems to indicate that some people are absurdly 
computer-illiterate . . . or honest?
	In Geneva newspapers used to be sold from open trays/boxes
 in the street, without vendor, and a box to put the money in. It worked 
(though one doubts 100%) (and the money box was 'closed' ;-)> !).

Michael Chapman.


P.S.   Interesting as all this is --and I don't want to try and grab the last 
word-- but I do fear we are getting a little distant from the main urpose of 
this list.  MC