On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 11:23:54AM -0700, Kathleen Wilson wrote: > On 5/20/14, 10:03 AM, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > Conclusions > > Some of CA/Browser forum baseline requirements seems to be getting > > adopted good, but there are still some certificates generated that > > don't follow the requirements. Other requirements don't seem to get > > adopted. Those that don't get adopted seem to have to do with things > > about the CA itself and not with subject of the certificates. > > Maybe we should re-visit the idea of a "wall of shame", and publicly list > the CAs who are still issuing certificates with the following problems.
I'm not sure how I feel about the wall of shame. > > News > > May 2013: I've been contacting CAs about the missing subject > > alternative name extension, since I think that's currently the > > biggest problem. Hopefully we'll see things improve over time. > > Thank you for doing that! How has it been going? I've actually didn't get any reply from the CAs (that are in the mozilla program) so far. I guess we'll have to wait and see. Kurt _______________________________________________ dev-security-policy mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
