No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Liability of Certification Service Providers Towards Relying Parties and the Need for a Clear System to Enhance the Level of Trust in Electronic Communication
Abstract
Building trust in electronic communication is probably the biggest challenge of this era. It is a key element to achieving widespread use of new technologies and reaping the full benefit of e-Commerce or other current phenomena like e-Government and e-Banking. Certification service providers can play a crucial role in the process of building trust in electronic communication, and clear and effective liability rules for these 'trust dispensers' - meaning a system which is understandable, user-friendly, coherent, and clear as to responsibilities and conditions for compensation - would give a strong impetus to the confidence of both consumers and businesses that rely on certificates. To that end, this article presents an in-depth analysis and re-interpretation of the liability of certification service providers as set out in Article 6 of the Electronic Signatures Directive. After balancing the pros and cons of the system recommended by the European legislator, another practicable system for the liability of certification service providers is proposed. This system is based on the concept of a different type of liability for different types of information provided in the certificates by certification service providers.
... Developing trust in online communication is a challenging task in the present circumstances when intruder attacks are becoming common. In the context of electronic communication, Balboni (2004) analysed the significance of having a liability mechanism in place for certification authority, and its impact on building trust in online communication. Further certification mechanism developed by European legislators has been analysed and key points such as promoting signatory body as RP and removal of reasonable reliance criteria could make certification mechanism clearer, predictable and easier to define responsibilities. ...
Purpose–This conceptual article’s primary aim is to identify the significant stakeholders of the digital identity system (DIS) and then highlight the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on each of the identified stakeholders. It also recommends vital points that could be considered by policymakers while developing technology-related policies for effective DIS.
Design/methodology/approach–This article uses stakeholder methodology and design theory (DT) as a primary theoretical lens along with the innovation diffusion theory (IDT) as a sub-theory. This article is based on the analysis of existing literature that mainly comprises academic literature, official reports, whitepapers and publicly available domain experts’ interviews.
Findings–The study identified six significant stakeholders, i.e. government, citizens, infrastructure providers, identity providers (IdP), judiciary and relying parties (RPs) of the DIS from the secondary data.Also, the role of IdP becomes insignificant in the context of AI-enabled digital identity systems (AIeDIS). The findings depict that AIeDIS can positively impact the DIS stakeholders by solving a range of problems such as identity theft, unauthorised access and credential misuse, and will also open a possibility of new ways to empower all the stakeholders.
Research limitations/implications–The study is based on secondary data and has considered DIS stakeholders from a generic perspective. Incorporating expert opinion and empirical validation of the hypothesis could derive more specific and context-aware insights.
Practical implications–The study could facilitate stakeholders to enrich further their understanding and significance of developing sustainable and future-ready DIS by highlighting the impact of AI on the digital identity ecosystem.
Originality/value–To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this article is the first of its kind that has used stakeholder theory, DT and IDT to explain the design and developmental phenomenon of AIeDIS. A list of six significant stakeholders of DIS, i.e. government, citizens, infrastructure providers, IdP, judiciary and RP, is identified through comprehensive literature analysis.
Security and privacy top the list of consumers' concerns in e-commerce. If there is concern, trust is unlikely to develop, and trust means money. The American initiative to tackle this issue using electronic quality certificates/seals as easy-to-recognise trustmarks is valuable. However, it is falling short because, among other reasons, the system underlying the certificates is not trustworthy. There is a lesson to learn for Europe since its market is still open for such initiatives. After having analysed the weak points of the American initiative I will discuss ways to set up a reliable quality certification system and possibilities to manage the liability risk related to providing such a service in Europe.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.