Примеры использования Certification services providers на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Public key infrastructure and certification services providers.
Under this model, certification services providers are connected in a peer-to-peer relationship.
Standards of conduct andliability rules for certification services providers only.
Certification services providers will issue certificates to each other; the pair of certificates describes their reciprocal trust relationship.
Generally, users will trust the certification services providers that issued their certificate.
Certification services providers must take the necessary measures to ensure that access to such information is in accordance with applicable data protection laws.
If a certification services provider wishes to limit the trust extended to other certification services providers, it must specify these limitations in the certificates issued to its peers.
Furthermore, certification services providers need to obtain a series of personal data and business information from persons applying for certificates.
Thus, while some rules may be flexible enough toaccommodate different electronic signature certification models, some systems would only recognize licensed certification services providers as possible issuers of"secure" or"qualified" certificates.
As a matter of business practice, certification services providers also often introduce an overall cap to their liability, on a contractual basis.
Certification services providers are expected to seek routinely as much as possible to limit their contractual and tort liability towards the signatory and relying parties.
In other countries the same result is achieved not by a statutory warranty,but by imposing on certification services providers a general duty to verify the information supplied by the signatory before issuing a certificate, or to establish systems for verifying such information.
Firstly, certification services providers may be reluctant to recognize foreign certificates or the keys issued by foreign certification services providers whose liability or standards of care may be lower than their own.
However, if the user community implements a trust domain by creating a mesh PKI,the"bridge" certification services provider will only need to establish a relationship with one of the PKI's certification services providers, which then becomes the"principal" certification services provider within that PKI for the purpose of establishing the"bridge of trust" to the other PKI.
In some countries, State-owned certification services providers issue certificates only in support of digital signatures used by the public administration.
By cumulating the requirement of substantive equivalence with European Union standards with the additional requirement of"accreditation under a scheme established in a member State",the European Union Directive on electronic signatures effectively requires foreign certification services providers to comply both with their original and with the European Union regime, which is a higher standard than is required from certification services providers accredited in a State member of the European Union.
This standard of care applies to certification services providers in respect of issuance and revocation of certificates and disclosure of information.
Certification services providers must keep safe the keys used to sign certificates issued to their customers and may be exposed to attempts by outsiders to gain unauthorized access to the keys see also part two, paras. below.
Whether international use of electronic signature and authentication methods is based on a cross-recognition or cross-certification scheme, a decision to recognize a whole PKI orone or more foreign certification services providers, or to establish equivalent levels between classes of certificates issued under different PKIs, presupposes an assessment of the equivalence between the domestic and the foreign certification practices and certificates.
Some laws expressly require certification services providers to purchase liability insurance or otherwise make public to all potential signatories, among other information, the financial guaranties for its possible liability.(c) Ability to contractually limit or disclaim liability.
The lack of hierarchy in such a system means that certification services providers cannot impose conditions governing the types of certificate issued by other certification services providers. .
First, if electronic signatures and the certification services providers who authenticate them are subject to conflicting legal and technical requirements in different jurisdictions, this may inhibit or prevent electronic signatures from being used in many cross-border transactions, if the electronic signature cannot satisfy the various jurisdictional requirements simultaneously.
For the same reasons, where the use of electronic signature andauthentication methods, or the activities of certification services providers, is provided for by legislation, the law typically subjects recognition of foreign certificates or certification services providers to some assessment of substantive equivalence with the reliability offered by domestic certificates and certification services providers.
It should be noted that, in practice, certification services providers issue certificates with various levels of reliability, according to the purposes for which the certificates are intended to be used by their customers.
A certification services provider typically issues certificates upon application by candidate signatories.
A third alternative structure is built around the so-called"bridge" certification services provider.
A certification service provider shall be liable for its failure to satisfy the requirements of paragraph 1.
It was pointed out that, in practice, certifications services providers maintained lists of revoked certificates, but not other types of lists as might be implied in subparagraph(1)b.
In that respect,the provisions on certification service providers in the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Signatures were mentioned.
Such an obligation, even if it were feasible in practice,would place an unreasonable burden upon certification service providers.