On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 08:38:29 -0700
John Nagle wrote:

Ok so it's sort of an improvement such as only the ip/domain which is
verified being shown on the cert reducing possible misleading but hasn't
actually dealt with the main problems at all. In fact as far as I can
tell it will just be a waste of money for everyone. Like I'm not busy
enough too.


>   Anonymous online businesses are illegal.
> 

Assumption is the mother of all ****ups.

You seem to be assuming criminals don't break the law?? I have a
hunch, I'm not sure why, that they do.

> 
> We (as SiteTruth) work to make web site ownership more visible,
> as you can see at the "sitetruth.com" site.  We encourage the CA
> and browser communities to work toward that.  Get tough on
> anonymous businesses. The law supports you in this.

I guess I'd need to look at your patent etc. but I am totally skeptical
that this is viable and effective (especially for new businesses) though
quite possibly of some use. Innovation has a hard enough time shining
through to it's deserved place as it is.


I still think it is far better to use a limited number of well looked
after possibly browser controlled CAs. I notice Google is a CA already.

I also think the only truly computer verifiable info being the domain/ip
should be reduced to a single authentication of being able to write to
the webspace.

The trust should come from brand and public review/bad review.
_______________________________________________
dev-security mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security

Reply via email to