142k views
0 votes
Without the reassurance of a handwritten ink signature, there is no obvious way to verify the authorship.

Alternatively, imagine that a bank receives an e-mail from a client, which instructs that all the client's funds should be transferred to a private numbered bank account in the Cayman Islands. Once again, without a handwritten signature, how does the bank know that the e-mail is really from the client? The e-mail could have been written by a criminal attempting to divert the money to his own Cayman Islands bank account. In order to develop trust on the Internet, it is essential that there is some form of reliable digital signature.

–The Code Book,
Simon Singh


Write three to five sentences evaluating the author’s argument. In your response, identify and evaluate the claim and whether the evidence supports the reason and the claim.

2 Answers

1 vote
I personally would agree completely with the author. He says that banks should require an electronic signature, and I couldn't agree more. If people would be required to have a signature then if the criminal has no clue what their handwriting looks like; or even if he does but is not able to make it look authentic... Then the persons money would be safe and the person attempting identift theft/ fraud would more then likely be investigated and could possibly stop other potental crimes the criminal may have gotten away with if it wasn't for the signature needed. Bank's today usually have a limit to what you can send without being there in person, this was put in effect so that if someone were to try and steal your money, they can only get away with so much...

Hope this helps, and good luck :)
User Paul Govan
by
4.8k points
3 votes

Answer:

The reason that protecting our information is important is so that people can be sure about who really sent them information. The evidence is a hypothetical situation about how a criminal could steal money by pretending to be someone else if encryption wasn't possible. The reason and evidence logically support the claim because they show one way that the Information Age would not be successful – people could easily steal money – if information is not protected.

Step-by-step explanation:

e2020

User Zack Peterson
by
5.3k points