电子数据的技术性鉴真  

Technical Authentication of Electronic Evidence

作　　者：谢登科[1] XIE Dengke

机构地区：[1]吉林大学法学院

出　　处：《法学研究》2022年第2期209-224,共16页Chinese Journal of Law

基　　金：国家社科基金重大项目“中国特色刑事证据理论体系研究”(18ZDA139);国家社科基金一般项目“电子数据区块链存证研究”(21BFX014)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：电子数据鉴真是信息时代重要的证据问题。我国司法机关在实践中尝试将完整性校验、可信时间戳、数字签名、区块链存证等信息技术应用于电子数据鉴真。这既源于传统的“保管链证明”和“独特性确认”鉴真方法无法完全适应电子数据的虚拟性、可分离性、海量性等特征,也源于证据鉴真方法的开放性所提供的制度空间和在线诉讼推广适用所产生的内在需求。技术性鉴真并非简单地将信息技术应用于电子数据鉴真,其也会带来电子数据鉴真方法和规则的改变。技术性鉴真在价值功能、鉴真标准等方面与传统鉴真方法并无区别,但在内在机理、证明责任、程序保障等方面存在较大差异,因此有必要在整合现有制度的基础上构建电子数据技术性鉴真规则。技术性鉴真有其适用边界,其主要适用于电子数据“单独提取”模式,在“转化收集”模式中的适用具有限制性,在“一体收集”模式中的适用则具有阶段性;技术性鉴真方法可与传统鉴真方法交叉适用,但也存在独立适用的发展态势;技术性鉴真仅能解决电子数据的形式真实性问题,而无法保障其实质真实性。在电子数据技术性鉴真中,应保障诉讼主体的平等参与和有效对抗。Authentication of electronic evidence is an important evidentiary issue in the age of information. In practice, information technologies such as integrity check value, trusted time-stamp, digital signature, and block-chain record are applied by judicial authorities in China in the authentication of electronic evidence. This is the result of the inability of traditional authentication methods, such as “chain of custody” and “uniqueness identification”, to effectively adapt themselves to the massive and virtual electronic evidence, as well as the institutional space created by the openness of the evidence authentication method system and the intrinsic demand created by the rapid development of online litigation. Technical authentication is not simply the application of information technologies to authentication of electronic evidence. It will bring about changes in the methods and rules of authentication of electronic evidence. Technical authentication methods and traditional authentication methods are not different in basic function and standard, but differ greatly in internal mechanism, burden of proof and procedural protection system. It is necessary to establish the rules of technical authentication for electronic evidence on the basis of integrating existing evidence rules. Technical authentication has its theoretical boundaries of application. It is mainly applicable to electronic evidence, but not the storage medium of electronic evidence. It can be applied alternately with traditional authentication, but there is a developing trend towards its independent application. It could solve the problem of only the formal, but not the substantive, authenticity of electronic evidence. In addition, it’s necessary to protect equal participation and the right to confrontation of litigants in authenticating electronic evidence by technical methods.

关 键 词：电子数据 鉴真 完整性校验 数字签名 区块链存证 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]