Court access point

Three types of access points at the user interface are common to all signature schemes (see Section 5.1.2, Granularity of Entities ) signer access points, recipient access points, and court access points. 

A dispute involves events at two or three access points a recipient access point, a court access point, and possibly the access point of the supposed signer. The supposed signer is defined as the one whose identity the court enters the adjective supposed is sometimes omitted in the following. The events described now are summarized in Figure 5.5, and some reasons for the decisions follow after the figure. 

An access point of a recipient or a court handles all the identities of signers. With simple signature schemes, this means that an entity of a recipient or a court handles all the public keys. This has the advantage that the administration of the relation between identities of signers and public keys is hidden inside the system. 

Disputes are between one recipient, one court, possibly one signer, and possibly all the centres. Thus all the access points of all new types may take part. The court s conclusion in a dispute may not only be that the message was or was not authenticated, but also that a certain subset of the centres is to blame. 

Secondly, from a purely theoretical point of view, consider what would happen if the identity was an input in such a service If the specification would really permit all identities at all access points, everybody could enter the identity of somebody else. Hence there would be no security in the intuitive sense of the real world. (This cannot be avoided by declaring something as the identity that someone else cannot enter, such as a password or biometric information The recipient and the court have to know an identity of the signer, and it is this very identity this paragraph deals with, because the requirements have to express facts like if a signer with a certain identity did not authenticate a message, no court should believe that the signer with this identity did .)... 

For the case where a user can sign under several identities, one might have defined access points that handle a certain number of identities and where the currently used identity is an input (whereas in the definition above, such a user needs several access points — of course, they can be implemented on the same device). However, in practice, a signer would not want to input an identity, i.e., the string under which recipients and courts know her, but a local identifier such as sign for bank or sign for credit card . This corresponds to the way access points are selected in software. 

One could have distinguished inputs init as signer , init as recipient , and init as court however, the same information is implicit in the types of the access points. 

Generalization. Both models presented above consider active attacks on all types of access points, i.e., not only on signers, but also on recipients and courts. 

The other reason is that, as mentioned in Section 5.2.9, a fiill fail-stop signature scheme is closely related to a scheme with special risk bearers where each user who acts as a signer, recipient, or court, also has a risk bearer s access point available. In fact, if a scheme is given where an arbitrary number of risk bearers can take part, one can constract a fiill fail-stop signature scheme as follows Each entity of the new scheme consists of two parts one part acts like a risk bearer s entity and the other like an entity of a signer, recipient, or court, respectively, from the underlying scheme. As risk bearers entities only take part in initialization, this only concerns the program parts for initialization (if those can be identified statically). The outer parts of all entities must handle the fact that the two parts share their ports. 

Haber s Institute was located in the prosperous Berlin suburb of Dahlem in a campus—like setting together with other K. W. institutes devoted to biochemistry, inorganic chemistry, silicate and fiber research. It was one of the most famous and most generously endowed research centers in the world. The Institute had modern equipment, workshops, a library, access to a luxurious clubhouse and even two tennis courts. It served as the focal point for seminars and meetings on physical chemistry in which Fritz Haber, the winner of the 1918 Nobel prize was the undisputed leader. 

---