🚀 go-pugleaf

	2)   Public keys and "signatures".

	     The  use of signatures depends even more than communication
	     and printed directories on the long term integrity  of  the
	     keys.   Any  "signature"  is valid, only as long as the key
	     has not been  compromised.

You need to be careful to separate technical issues from business/application
issues.  In particular, if you extend the paradigm stated in The OSI
Directory, "authentication is only valid at the time it occurs", then a
signature is only valid at the time it is signed.

Your concern about non-repudiation is real, and your solution is typical,
but it is not a technical problem in as much as digital signatures are not
exactly the same as written signatures.

	5)   RSA  is  patented in the USA (except for the Government and
	     MIT?).

	     In any case, the adoption of  anything  as
	     an  international standard normally requires that it not be
	     proprietary.  Recently I have witnessed a  heated  argument
	     between  a representative of RSA Inc and the co-chairman of
	     an IEEE committee on this very point (i.e.  if  THEY  can't
	     agree,  I  think  this  list would only be wasting its time
	     discussing this point - just lets note it).

Please note, RSA has not been adopted as an international standard.  The
Annex comprising its specification is not an integral part of the standard.
I understand this is a minor point, practically speaking, but an important
one nonetheless.

Further, the Directory Services SIG of the OSI Implementor's Workshop
has identified an alternative digital signature algorithm and has created
agreements explaining how to use it, for just the reasons you cite.  Thus,
they are not mandating any particular algorithm and they are going to
great pains to be sure there is an option, given the constraints to
non-government, US organizations.

Jim