• Title/Summary/Keyword: 대리 서명

Search Result 62, Processing Time 0.018 seconds

An Authentication Protocol Supporting User Device Mobility in CAS-Based IPTV Environments (CAS 시스템 기반의 IPTV 환경에서 사용자 단말 이동성 지원을 위한 인증 프로토콜)

  • Roh, Hyo-Sun;Jung, Seo-Hyun;Yi, Jeong-Hyun;Jung, Sou-Hwan
    • The Journal of Korean Institute of Communications and Information Sciences
    • /
    • v.35 no.2B
    • /
    • pp.302-312
    • /
    • 2010
  • Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) service is the convergence service of the telecommunication and broadcasting that provides various bidirectional multimedia contents by IPTV service subscribe's request through the high-speed internet. However, the proposed technologies current do not guarantee the security such as authentication between Set-Top-Box (STB) and the user mobile devices available IPTV service at home domain, and authentication of mobile user device at out of door. This paper proposes the authentication protocol for distributing content securely from STB to the users' mobile devices at home domain and authentication for network access and IPTV service access when the user's mobile device is moved out of the house. The proposed scheme using the proxy signature enables to distribute and protect securely the contents protected through an underlying Conditional Access System (CAS) without re-encrypting then that the existing scheme should employ. Then this protocol supports the authentication scheme to get service access authentication based on network access authentication using the signature, which the STB issued on behalf of the trust authority of IPTV service provider. Also the proposed authentication protocol reduces the total communication overhead and computation time comparing to the other authentication protocol.

Enforcement of Arbitral Agreement to Non-Signatory in America (미국에 있어서 비서명자에 대한 중재합의의 효력)

  • Suh, Se-Won
    • Journal of Arbitration Studies
    • /
    • v.18 no.1
    • /
    • pp.71-96
    • /
    • 2008
  • Arbitration is fundamentally a matter of contract, whereby contractual parties may only be required to submit a dispute to arbitration pursuant to their formal agreement. However, there are several important exceptions to this rule that have developed under common law notions of implied consent. These doctrines may serve either to benefit or to harm a nonsignatory to an arbitral agreement because either (1) the nonsignatory may compel a signatory to the agreement to arbitrate a dispute or (2) the nonsignatory may be compelled to arbitrate a dispute despite never having signed an arbitration agreement. The Court has a long-standing domestic policy of favoring arbitration, and these doctrines reflect that policy. 1. incorporation by reference An arbitration clause may apply to a party who is a nonsignatory to one agreement containing an arbitration clause but who is a signatory to a second agreement that incorporates the terms of the first agreement. 2. assumption An arbitration clause may apply to a nonsignatory who has impliedly agreed to arbitrate. Under this theory, the nonsignatory's conduct is a determinative factor. For example, a nonsignatory who voluntarily begins arbitrating the merits of a dispute before an arbitral tribunal may be bound by the arbitrator's ruling on that dispute even though the nonsignatory was not initially required to arbitrate the dispute. 3. agency A nonsignatory to an arbitration agreement may be bound to arbitrate a dispute stemming from that agreement under the traditional laws of agency. A principal may also be bound to arbitrate a claim based on an agreement containing an arbitration clause signed by the agent. The agent, however, does not generally become individually bound by executing such an agreement on behalf of a disclosed principal unless there is clear evidence that the agent intended to be bound. 4. veil piercing/alter ego In the corporate context, a nonsignatory corporation to an arbitration agreement may be bound by that agreement if the agreement is signed by its parent, subsidiary, or affiliate. 5. estoppel The doctrine of equitable estoppel is usually applied by nonsignatory defendants who wish to compel signatory plaintiffs to arbitrate a dispute. This will generally be permitted when (1) the signatory must rely on the terms of the contract in support of its claims against the nonsignatory, or (2) the signatory alleges that it and the nonsignatory engaged in interdependent misconduct that is intertwined with the obligations imposed by the contract. Therefore, this article analyzed these doctrines centering around case-law in America.

  • PDF