That’s pretty much exactly not what I said.

 

From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:r...@sleevi.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 10:38 PM
To: Tim Hollebeek <tim.holleb...@digicert.com>
Cc: Paul Kehrer <paul.l.keh...@gmail.com>; 
mozilla-dev-security-pol...@lists.mozilla.org; r...@sleevi.com
Subject: Re: Misissuance/non-compliance remediation timelines

 

So your view is the “carrot” is getting to use Mozilla’s brand as an 
endorsement, and the “stick” being that if you don’t get that endorsement for a 
while, you get kicked out?

 

The assumption is that the branding of “best” is valuable - presumably, through 
the indirect benefit of being able to appeal to customers as “the highest rated 
(by Mozilla) CA”.

 

In practice, much like the CA/Browser Forum indirectly gave birth to the CA 
“Security” Council, or the existence of firms like Netcraft or NSS Labs, the 
more common outcome seems to be that if you don’t like the rules of the game 
you’re playing, you make up your own/redefine them and try to claim equivalency 
(much lol “alternative facts”). That is, I’m skeptical of approaches that 
attempt to say “most good,” because those seem to encourage all sorts of games 
of coming up with their own schemes, while “least bad” is more actionable - as 
“most bad” is more likely to receive sanctions.

 

On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 10:03 PM Tim Hollebeek via dev-security-policy 
<dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org 
<mailto:dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> > wrote:

Absolutely not.  I view the competition as being based as the “most best”.



You cannot get an “A” (or even A- or B+) without significantly exceeding the 
minimum requirements, or demonstrating behaviors and practices that, while not 
required, are behaviors Mozilla wants to encourage.



Sticks are good.  Carrots are tasty.



-Tim



Do you see the competition based on being the 'least bad' (i.e. more likely to 
get an A because of no issues than a B because of some?)

_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org 
<mailto:dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> 
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy

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

_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy

Reply via email to