Glad you also answered the key question I posted some time ago (the
last one in the PDF).
According to your answer it appears that the majority of problematic
certificates were, to the WebPKI relying parties, correct and valid
certificates that simply had the legal names of the certificate holder
On 31/01/2017 18:53, Jernej Simončič wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 09:27:30 -0800, Peter Bowen wrote:
Does this imply that addresses in the Czech Republic do not use a
state or province?
I don't know about Czech Republic, but they definitely don't in Slovenia,
and it's always annoying when forms
On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 09:27:30 -0800, Peter Bowen wrote:
> Does this imply that addresses in the Czech Republic do not use a
> state or province?
I don't know about Czech Republic, but they definitely don't in Slovenia,
and it's always annoying when forms force you to put something there (and
then
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 5:50 AM, Hubert Kario wrote:
> On Monday, 30 January 2017 23:48:51 CET Peter Bowen wrote:
>> See notes inline about known cities with numbers in their name.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Peter Bowen wrote:
>> > While it is very hard to validate the subject conten
On Monday, 30 January 2017 23:48:51 CET Peter Bowen wrote:
> See notes inline about known cities with numbers in their name.
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Peter Bowen wrote:
> > While it is very hard to validate the subject content of certificates
> > outside of DNS names, there are a num
5 matches
Mail list logo
