Aaron Griffin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Magnus Therning<[email protected]> wrote:
Aaron Griffin wrote:
[..]

It's not invalid, it's self-signed, so there's no certificate authority
stamp-of-approval on it. We had a free year certificate at one point, but
decided not to waste the money for a real certificate if it's only used by
the devs.
One option would be getting one from CACert.org.  Of course it won't be
worth
a lot without putting their root cert in
openssl/firefox/konquerer/epiphany/etc...

We looked into that, but that's not much better than a self signed cert. We
discussed this at length among the devs, and already made a decision. We're
well aware of all the options :)

What was the line of reasoning behind "not much better than a self signed
cert"?

/M

--
Magnus Therning                        (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4)
magnus@therning.org          Jabber: magnus@therning.org
http://therning.org/magnus         identi.ca|twitter: magthe

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to