On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Nick Lamb via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:

> On Friday, 11 August 2017 14:19:57 UTC+1, Alex Gaynor  wrote:
> > Given that these were all caught by cablint, has Let's Encrypt considered
> > integrating it into your issuance pipeline, or automatically monitoring
> > crt.sh (which runs cablint) for these issues so they don't need to be
> > caught manually by researchers?
>
> The former has the risk of being unexpectedly fragile,


Could you expand on this? It's not obvious what you mean.


> This way: If cablint breaks, or won't complete in a timely fashion during
> high volume issuance, it doesn't break the CA itself. But on the other hand
> it also doesn't wail on Comodo's generously offered public service crt.sh.
>

Could you expand on what you mean by "cablint breaks" or "won't complete in
a timely fashion"? That doesn't match my understanding of what it is or how
it's written, so perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you're proposing?
_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy

Reply via email to