Re: [rekenaarterme] Authentication Expand Messages
T PistoriusHi Ek dink nie identifiseer kan werk vir authenticate nie - dikwels word in handelsreg (regsaspeke van e-handel) verwys na identification and
Ek dink nie "identifiseer" kan werk vir "authenticate" nie - dikwels word in handelsreg (regsaspeke van e-handel) verwys na "identification and authentication". Ek dink "waarmerking" is die korrekte vertaling.
Die EKT Wet (25 van 2002) definieer die term "authentication products or services" as 'waarmerkingsprodukte of -dienste' naamlik produkte of dienste wat ontwerp is om die houer van 'n elektroniese handtekening aan ander persone te identifiseer; dit gaan egter verdfer en is is egter eerder bevestiging of bekragtiging van die ware identiteit van 'n persoon, vandaar waarmerking.
Using Distributed Authentication sal dus wees gebruik van "Verdeelde Waarmerking" of "Verspreide Waarmerking"? Wat is tegnies meer korrek?
>>> ITBJDM@... 01/12/06 08:15AM >>>
Dit is wel die egte Afrikaanse woorde maar as dit gebruik word wanneer jy aanteken by 'n webblad klink dit nie vir my heeltemal reg nie.
"Using Distributed Authentication to log on to the site".
"Die gebruik van Verspreide Bekragtiging om aan te teken tot die webblad".
Ek weet darem nie! Maar jou voorstelle klink goed en is sekerlik reg...
>>> igitur@... 1/11/2006 7:22 PM >>>
Jammer, julle, ek moes EERS in die woordeboek gaan kyk het voordat voorstelle gemaak het.
Woordeboek sê authenticat(-e/-ion) = waarmerk(ing) of bekragtig(ing)
Lekker egte Afrikaanse woorde :)
----- Original Message ----- From: "Kobus Myburgh" <ITBJDM@...>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 2:55 PM
Subject: [rekenaarterme] Authentication
Wat van "Identifiseer" vir "Authenticate"? Of "Identifisering" vir "Authentication"?
Aanteken: leë e-pos aan rekenaarterme-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Afteken: leë e-pos aan rekenaarterme-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links
Aanteken: le e-pos aan rekenaarterme-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Afteken: le
<<<< gwavasig >>>> Kobus MyburghTana, Dankie vir jou antwoord. Ek verkies persoonlik Verspreide bo Verdeelde weens die negatiewe konnotasie wat met verdeeldheid gepaard gaan. Verder,
Dankie vir jou antwoord. Ek verkies persoonlik "Verspreide" bo "Verdeelde" weens die negatiewe konnotasie wat met "verdeeldheid" gepaard gaan. Verder, tydens my studies het die dosent ook gereeld gepraat van "verspreide". Ek sal dus "Verspreide Waarmerking" gebruik.
>>> Pistot@... 1/12/2006 9:10:35 AM >>>
Aanteken: leë e-pos aan rekenaarterme-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Afteken: leë e-pos aan rekenaarterme-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links Jackie ViljoenWat presies is die EKT Wet? Dui asb die volle naam en nommer aan, sodat dit in ons lysie kan ingaan.
Wat presies is die EKT Wet? Dui asb die volle naam en nommer aan, sodat dit in ons lysie kan ingaan.
Samuel Murray... Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002 http://www.acts.co.za/ect_act/ Hierdie wet is n mishmash van feite en flaters. Ingevolge hierdie wet
Jackie Viljoen wrote on 12/01/2006 10:50 AM:
> Wat presies is die EKT Wet?
Hierdie wet is 'n mishmash van feite en flaters. Ingevolge hierdie wet moet elkeen wat byvoorbeeld Mozilla op CD of op 'n plaaslike webwerf beskikbaar stel, op die regering se kriptografieverskaffers-databasis registreer. Dis net... dié databasis moet nog geskep word, en ek weet nie wat die registrasiefooi gaan wees nie.
T PistoriusHi Dis die Elektroniese Kommunikasie en Transaksies Wet 25 van 2002. Sy Engelse boetie is Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002. ... Wat
Hi Dis die Elektroniese Kommunikasie en Transaksies Wet 25 van 2002. Sy Engelse boetie is Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002.
>>> jacqvil@... 01/12/06 10:50AM >>>
Pedrie Roberts... Dis die Wet op Elektroniese Kommunikasie en Transaksies. ... This email and its contents are subject to an email legal notice that can be viewed at:
T Pistorius: > Dis die Elektroniese Kommunikasie en Transaksies Wet 25 van > 2002.
Dis die Wet op Elektroniese Kommunikasie en Transaksies.
This email and its contents are subject to an email legal notice that can be viewed at: http://www.naspers.com/email/disclaimer.html. Should you be unable to access the link provided, please email us for a copy at Helpdesk@.... Hierdie e-pos en sy inhoud is onderhewig aan 'n regskennisgewing oor elektroniese pos wat gelees kan word by http://www.naspers.com/epos/vrywaring.html. 'n Afskrif kan aangevra word by Helpdesk@.... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hendrik Visage... Soek nou net n goeie Afrikaans vir mishmash ... ... Dis die eerste vlak, die groter implikasies is dat as jy jou Audi A4 met n enkoderende afstand
On 1/12/06, Samuel Murray <leuce@...> wrote: > Jackie Viljoen wrote on 12/01/2006 10:50 AM:
> > Wat presies is die EKT Wet?
> Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002
> Hierdie wet is 'n mishmash van feite en flaters.
Soek nou net 'n goeie Afrikaans vir "mishmash"...
> Ingevolge hierdie wet
> moet elkeen wat byvoorbeeld Mozilla op CD of op 'n plaaslike webwerf
> beskikbaar stel, op die regering se
> registreer. Dis net... dié databasis moet nog geskep word, en ek weet
> nie wat die registrasiefooi gaan wees nie.
Dis die eerste vlak, die groter implikasies is dat as jy jou Audi A4 met 'n
enkoderende afstand beheer sleutel wil verkoop...
Die vinnige geskiedenis is dat die onderskeppings wetgewing (Van die
department(e)) die kryptografie seksies gehad het was daar 'n redelike ophef
en toe het die departement(e) betrokke by kommunikasie en handel die
seksies ingesluit :(
Samuel Murray... Onthou die beginsels van terugvertaalbaarheid en terugherkenbaarheid. Identifisering vertaal terug na identification , wat nie dieselfde as
Kobus Myburgh wrote on 11/01/2006 02:55 PM:
> Wat van "Identifiseer" vir "Authenticate"? Of "Identifisering" vir
Onthou die beginsels van terugvertaalbaarheid en terugherkenbaarheid. "Identifisering" vertaal terug na "identification", wat nie dieselfde as "authentication" is nie. Ek het intussen gaan loer en gesien dat in die Opera-vertaling wel "stawing" vir "authentication" gebruik is (vir "logging" is "boekstawing" gebruik).
M SIMPSONHi Dit is die eerste keer dat ek deelneem aan die gesprek. Wat van geloofwaardigheidstoets (Authenticicate) ... From: Samuel Murray
Dit is die eerste keer dat ek deelneem aan die gesprek.
Wat van "geloofwaardigheidstoets" (Authenticicate) ----- Original Message -----
From: "Samuel Murray" <leuce@...>
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: [rekenaarterme] Authentication
Onthou die beginsels van terugvertaalbaarheid en terugherkenbaarheid.
"Identifisering" vertaal terug na "identification", wat nie dieselfde as
"authentication" is nie. Ek het intussen gaan loer en gesien dat in die
Opera-vertaling wel "stawing" vir "authentication" gebruik is (vir
"logging" is "boekstawing" gebruik).
Afteken: leë e-pos aan rekenaarterme-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Yahoo! Groups Links Sarel OlckersWat van bemagtig vir authenticate en Magtiging vir authentication? ... Hi Dit is die eerste keer dat ek deelneem aan die gesprek. Wat van
Wat van "bemagtig" vir authenticate
"Magtiging" vir authentication?
>>> monsim@... 01/22/06 7:07 PM >>>
Afteken: leë e-pos aan rekenaarterme-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "rekenaarterme" on the web.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer This e-mail transmission contains confidential information,
which is the property of the sender.
The information in this e-mail or attachments thereto is intended for the attention and use only of the addressee. Should you have received this e-mail in error, please delete and destroy it and any attachments thereto immediately. Under no circumstances will the Cape Peninsula University of Technology or the sender of this e-mail be liable to any party for
any direct, indirect, special or other consequential damages for any
For the detailed e-mail disclaimer please refer to http://www.cput.ac.za/email.php or call +27 (0)21 460 3911
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Viljoen HCMagtiging faal ongelukkig die terugvertaalbaarheidstoets: die Engels daarvoor is empowerment . Groete Christo ... From: Sarel Olckers
"Magtiging" faal ongelukkig die terugvertaalbaarheidstoets: die Engels daarvoor is "empowerment".
From: "Sarel Olckers" <olckerss@...>
Subject: Re: Authentication
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Samuel Murray... Dit is ook reeds die vertaling vir authorisation , is dit nie? Samuel -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version:
Viljoen HC wrote:
> "Magtiging" faal ongelukkig die terugvertaalbaarheidstoets: die
> Engels daarvoor is "empowerment".
Dit is ook reeds die vertaling vir "authorisation", is dit nie?
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.22/238 - Release Date: 2006-01-23
Edward Gentlewat van waarmerking ...... ... From: Samuel Murray To: Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 10:30 PM
wat van waarmerking ......
----- Original Message ----- From: "Samuel Murray" <leuce@...>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 10:30 PM
Yahoo! Groups Links Petri Jooste... Ek hou van die voorstel waarmerking vir authentication want ek kan aan n paar vertaalsituasies dink waar waarmerk en waarmerking goed kan werk in n
>>gentlegiant@... 01/25/06 11:18 pm >>>
>>wat van waarmerking ......
Ek hou van die voorstel waarmerking vir authentication want ek kan aan 'n paar vertaalsituasies dink waar waarmerk en waarmerking goed kan werk in 'n rekenaarkonteks: bv. Authentication, cookies, and sessions can add security and a personal touch to your site. Daar is egter ook kontekste waar iets soos bevestig/bevestiging van identiteit dalk beter werk Die bank's web site first authenticated me before allowing the transaction. Die bank se webwerf moes eers my identiteit bevestig voordat .... eerder as Die bank se webwerf het my gewaarmerk ... Hier volg Wikipedia se uiteensetting van athentication. Miskien help dit ons vorentoe. Groete Petri Authentication From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. In computer security, authentication is the process by which a computer, computer program, or another user attempts to confirm that the computer, computer program, or user from whom the second party has received some communication is, or is not, the claimed first party. A blind credential, in contrast, does not establish identity at all, but only a narrow right or status of the user or program. In a Web of trust authentication is a way to ensure users are who they say they are--that the user who attempts to perform functions in a system is in fact the user who is authorized to do so. To distinguish authentication from the closely related term authorization, the short-hand notations A1 (authentication) and A2 (authorization) are occasionally used. The problem of authorization is often thought to be identical to that of authentication; many widely adopted standard security protocols, obligatory regulations, and even statutes are based on this assumption. However, there are many cases in which these two problems are distinct. One familiar example is access control. A computer system supposed to be used only by those authorized must attempt to detect and exclude the unauthorized. Access to it is therefore usually controlled by insisting on an authentication procedure to establish with some established degree of confidence the identity of the user, thence granting those privileges as may be authorized to that identity. Common examples of access control involving authentication include: * withdrawing cash from an ATM. * controlling a remote computer over the Internet. * using an Internet banking system. However, note that much of the discussion on these topics is misleading because terms are used without precision. Part of this confusion may be due to the 'law enforcement' tone of much of the discussion. No computer, computer program, or computer user can 'confirm the identity' of another party. It is not possible to 'establish' or 'prove' an identity, either. There are tricky issues lurking under what appears to be a straightforward surface. It is only possible to apply one or more tests which, if passed, have been previously declared to be sufficient to proceed. The problem is to determine which tests are sufficient, and many such are inadequate. There have been many instances of such tests having been spoofed successfully; they have by their failure shown themselves, inescapably, to be inadequate. Many people continue to regard the test(s) -- and the decision to regard success in passing them -- as acceptable, and blame their failure on 'sloppiness' or 'incompetence' on the part of someone. The problem is that the test was supposed to work in practice -- not under ideal conditions of no sloppiness or incompetence -- and did not. It is the test which has failed in such cases. Consider the very common case of a confirmation email which must be replied to in order to activate an online account of some kind. Since email can easily be arranged to go to or come from bogus and untraceable addresses, this is just about the least authentication possible. Success in passing this test means little, without regard to sloppiness or incompetence.
Chavoux LuytHallo ... Waarmerk het vir my n bietjie nouer betekenis as die idee van authentication. ... Identiteit bevestig is die regte idee (waarmerk is maar net een
> From: "Petri Jooste" <rkwjpj@...>
> Subject: Re: Authentication
> >>gentlegiant@... 01/25/06 11:18 pm >>>
> >>wat van waarmerking ......
> Ek hou van die voorstel waarmerking vir authentication want ek kan aan 'n paar
> vertaalsituasies dink waar waarmerk en waarmerking goed kan werk in 'n >rekenaarkonteks:
> bv. Authentication, cookies, and sessions can add security and a personal touch to >your site.
Waarmerk het vir my 'n bietjie nouer betekenis as die idee van authentication.
> Daar is egter ook kontekste waar iets soos bevestig/bevestiging van identiteit dalk beter >werk
> Die bank's web site first authenticated me before allowing the transaction.
> Die bank se webwerf moes eers my identiteit bevestig voordat ....
> eerder as
> Die bank se webwerf het my gewaarmerk ...
Identiteit bevestig is die regte idee (waarmerk is maar net een metode
waarmee dit gedoen kan word), maar dis te lank (2 woorde). Wat van
"stawing" en "staaf" (soos deur Opera gebruik)? Dit is lekker kort,
dit verskil van boekstaaf (log) en dit hou ook die idee in van
identiteit (of iets anders) te bevestig.
> Hier volg Wikipedia se uiteensetting van athentication. Miskien help dit ons vorentoe.
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
> In computer security, authentication is the process by which a computer, computer >program, or another user attempts to confirm that the computer, computer program, or >user from whom the second party has received some communication is, or is not, the >claimed first party. A blind credential, in contrast, does not establish identity at all, but >only a narrow right or status of the user or program.
> In a Web of trust authentication is a way to ensure users are who they say they are--that >the user who attempts to perform functions in a system is in fact the user who is >authorized to do so.
> To distinguish authentication from the closely related term authorization, the short-hand >notations A1 (authentication) and A2 (authorization) are occasionally used.
"Authorization" is vir my meer dieselfde as magtiging (en word ook so
> The problem of authorization is often thought to be identical to that of authentication; >many widely adopted standard security protocols, obligatory regulations, and even >statutes are based on this assumption. However, there are many cases in which these >two problems are distinct.
> One familiar example is access control. A computer system supposed to be used only >by those authorized must attempt to detect and exclude the unauthorized. Access to it is >therefore usually controlled by insisting on an authentication procedure to establish with >some established degree of confidence the identity of the user, thence granting those >privileges as may be authorized to that identity. Common examples of access control >involving authentication include:
> * withdrawing cash from an ATM.
> * controlling a remote computer over the Internet.
> * using an Internet banking system.
> However, note that much of the discussion on these topics is misleading because terms >are used without precision. Part of this confusion may be due to the 'law enforcement' >tone of much of the discussion. No computer, computer program, or computer user can >'confirm the identity' of another party.
'confirm the identity' = bevestig die identiteit
>It is not possible to 'establish' or 'prove' an identity, >either.
There are tricky issues lurking >under what appears to be a
Nog 'n rede waarom "stawing" vir my 'n lekker term is... dit het ook
die idee dat dit die persoon se aanspraak "staaf" dat hy is wie hy sê
hy is, sonder dat dit dit regtig "bewys".
> It is only possible to apply one or more tests which, if passed, have been previously >declared to be sufficient to proceed. The problem is to determine which tests are >sufficient, and many such are inadequate. There have been many instances of such tests >having been spoofed successfully; they have by their failure shown themselves, >inescapably, to be inadequate. Many people continue to regard the test(s) -- and the >decision to regard success in passing them -- as acceptable, and blame their failure on >'sloppiness' or 'incompetence' on the part of someone. The problem is that the test was >supposed to work in practice -- not under ideal conditions of no sloppiness or >incompetence -- and did not. It is the test which has failed in such cases. Consider the >very common case of a confirmation email which must be replied to in order to activate an >online account of some kind. Since email can easily be arranged to go to or come from >bogus and untraceable addresses, this is just about the least authentication possible. >Success in passing this test means little, without regard to sloppiness or incompetence.