> Also, it's worth bearing in mind that the number of bits is a
> distractor. All the weakness comes from elsewhere, so fiddling around
> with the bits is just so much numerology that amuses NIST and numerate
> managers and others. It does little for overall security.
Well it is not a distrac
On 22/08/13 07:09, Mikko Rantalainen wrote:
> Perhaps I'm not an average user but I would like to be informed about
> changed key in all those cases.
You are definitely not the average user.
>>> 2 year certs if time limit increases security? Why not issue a
>>> new signature every day and be done
On 22/08/13 09:09 AM, Mikko Rantalainen wrote:
On Friday, 16 August 2013 12:01:51 UTC+3, Gervase Markham wrote:
On 15/08/13 11:22, Mikko Rantalainen wrote:
No. The site's public key does not need to be changed to request a
new certificate.
Technically, no. But there are other occasions on w
