On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at 11:04:53 AM UTC-5, Gervase Markham wrote:
> If you have suggestions on how to improve this definition, let's keep
> brevity in mind :-)

Perhaps some reference to technologically incorrect syntax (i.e. an incorrectly 
encoded certificate) being a mis-issuance?

How far does "those containing information which was not properly validated" 
go?  Does that leave the opportunity for someone's tortured construction of the 
rule to suggest that a certificate that everyone agrees is NOT mis-issued is in 
fact technically mis-issued?
dev-security-policy mailing list

Reply via email to