I'll go further, and protest why the EV cert was revoked. Why can't Ian have a "Stripe, Inc." EV certificate for his business if he wants to? What makes the payment processing company somehow more deserving of one than Ian's company? Why was GoDaddy allowed to effectively take Ian's site down without his consent?
If this is how EV is going to be handled, I think it's time to seriously discuss removing the display of EV information from Mozilla products. -- Eric On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 3:31 PM, Jonathan Rudenberg via dev-security-policy <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018, at 15:27, Matthew Hardeman via dev-security-policy > wrote: > > It was injudicious of a CA to issue another certificate in this name for > > this entity after the already well documented controversy. Did they just > > not care that it would invite trouble or did they not know that it would > > invite controversy and trouble because they didn't track it the first > time > > around? > > What "trouble" is being invited? I don't see a problem. Everything is > operating exactly as expected. GoDaddy did nothing wrong. > _______________________________________________ > dev-security-policy mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy > -- konklone.com | @konklone <https://twitter.com/konklone> _______________________________________________ dev-security-policy mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
