If you look back to the mid 1990's, the great dreams of the security technologists were that you could prove beyond any possible doubt the authenticity of a document by giving it a digital signature, and exactly and precisely when it was created by a timestamp.

So what happened?  If that was the proof beyond all possible, probable shadow of doubt (Gilbert & Sullivan: Gondoliers) that whatever it was could not be implemented, then the deafening silence of more than 10 years is proof positive enough.

Of course there continue to be people, or even large companies, who want you to open a significantly large (wallet, checking account) commitment to the PKI pipe dream of what life would be like if everything is perfect and computer manufacturers behave like model gentlemen and a Hacker is the permanent secretary to the British Prime Minister (please see the famous series Yes Minister for further details).

Or maybe not.

Lewis Carroll once famously said in the persona of the White Queen, "Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."  But it does take more than a little practice!

Digital signatures are fine provided you believe absolutely the people who gave them, and they are financially warranted up to the hilt if what you are doing fails (and btw as you were reading this I just revoked my digital signature - so does that make this a pack of lies?).  

Timestamping?  I know people who have patents over the measuring and allocating of time.  Poor old Lewis Carroll as the Mad Hatter was condemned to perpetual tea time when accused of 'Murdering the time,' and so it was always half past three (sounds a bit like Jeremy Clarkson?).  We have plenty of law to establish when something happened that has nothing at all to do with the concept of the atomic clock, let alone the claims of timestamping systems.

Yes, it is true, that if you personally commit yourself to digital signatures and timestamps then you can live in a world that Lewis Carroll could well have identified with, if not sympathised with, but that was Wonderland.

And if you do spot a Snark, please, please, please check it isn’t a Boojum (!?).

So, although it's frightfully technologically clever, just pause for a moment and ask yourself if it sounds more like a banker offering you subordinated debt as a Grade A profitable investment.  You know what I mean.