Hi,
* Andrew Ayer [Wed Dec 16, 2015 at 09:54:58AM -0800]:
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 21:59:27 -0600 Michael Shuler
> wrote:
> > Thanks for your thoughts. A separate package is an interesting interim
> > idea, but in looking at what redhat has done, I think a more complete
> > transition to trust type
Hi Michael,
On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 21:59:27 -0600
Michael Shuler wrote:
> Thanks for your thoughts. A separate package is an interesting interim
> idea, but in looking at what redhat has done, I think a more complete
> transition to trust type buckets is preferred, along with including a
> code-sig
On 12/14/2015 07:45 PM, Andrew Ayer wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 18:45:40 -0600
> Michael Shuler wrote:
>
>>> As always, let me know if you could use any help. I'm going to
>>> start looking through the reverse depends for ca-certificates to
>>> identify packages that might be relying on roots f
On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 18:45:40 -0600
Michael Shuler wrote:
> > As always, let me know if you could use any help. I'm going to
> > start looking through the reverse depends for ca-certificates to
> > identify packages that might be relying on roots for email
> > authentication.
>
> Exactly. I also
On 12/14/2015 06:18 PM, Andrew Ayer wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> Have you given any more thought to a redesign of ca-certificates that
> separates the email certificates from the TLS certificates? I suspect
Yep - got a patch? :-)
> that the vast majority of packages that depend on ca-certificates
Hi Michael,
Have you given any more thought to a redesign of ca-certificates that
separates the email certificates from the TLS certificates? I suspect
that the vast majority of packages that depend on ca-certificates use
it for TLS server auth, and yet there are currently 21 roots in the NSS
sto
6 matches
Mail list logo
