Looking at the threat from a defense-in-depth/orthogonal  perspective,
doesn't it make sense that  everyone -- browsers, ICANN, CAs, etc. -- does
something to combat malicious websites for the public? 

-----Original Message-----
From: dev-security-policy
[mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Peter Bowen
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 9:23 AM
To: Gervase Markham <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; Kathleen Wilson
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: SSL Certs for Malicious Websites

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 7:16 AM, Gervase Markham <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think the bullet as a whole could mean that we reserve the right to 
> not include CAs who happily issue certs to "www.paypalpayments.com" to 
> just anyone without any checks or High Risk string list or anything.
> Such a cert, unless issued to Paypal, Inc., is clearly to be used for 
> fraud, IMO, and a CA is negligent in issuing it given that it's not 
> hard to flag for manual review any cert containing the names of major 
> banks and payment companies.

Playing Devil's Advocate for a moment, if paypalpayments.com is a valid
registered domain and is owned by A Better World LLC (a Delaware
Corporation), why should they not be able to get a certificate for their
domain?

How far do you take it?  According to
http://brandirectory.com/league_tables/table/banking-500-2014, top bank
brands include "TD", "UBS", and "ING", should CAs block on "outdoor.sh",
"nightclubs.io", and "exceeding.ly"?

Why should Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation be considered to have
claim to HSBC than the Humane Society of Broward County, the House Small
Business Committee, or Hobe Sound Bible College?

Given that there is already the ICANN UDRP, shouldn't that be the
venue to decide who is authorized to have what domain names?   Should
CAs be responsible for making calls on who is authorized for a domain name?

Thanks,
Peter
_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy

Reply via email to