I strongly disagree. The discussion around errors like these masks the
bigger issues in the noise.  If there are bigger issues, let's find those. 

-----Original Message-----
From: dev-security-policy
[mailto:dev-security-policy-bounces+jeremy.rowley=digicert.com@lists.mozilla
.org] On Behalf Of David E. Ross via dev-security-policy
Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 4:35 PM
To: mozilla-dev-security-pol...@lists.mozilla.org
Subject: Re: Certificates with metadata-only subject fields

On 8/9/2017 2:54 PM, Jonathan Rudenberg wrote:
> 
>> On Aug 9, 2017, at 17:50, Peter Bowen <pzbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The point of certlint was to help identify issues.  While I 
>> appreciate it getting broad usage, I don't think pushing for 
>> revocation of every certificate that trips any of the Error level checks
is productive.
> 
> I agree, and I don't really have a position on the revocation of
certificates with errors that do not appear to have any security impact like
these.
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 

I strongly disagree.  Errors like this make me question whether the
certification authority is sufficiently competent to be trusted.  Small
errors can indicate an increased likelihood of serious errors.

--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

President Trump demands loyalty to himself from Republican members of
Congress.  I always thought that members of Congress -- House and Senate --
were required to be loyal to the people of the United States.  In any case,
they all swore an oath of office to be loyal to the Constitution.
_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy

Reply via email to