Dan Veditz wrote:
I don't really care about helping CA's sell more expensive certs, but I do
want them to do more validation with an explicit standard we can hold them
to. If we can offer a usable and effective UI differentiator for EV certs
maybe we and the CA's can both get what we want (big if). Threatening to
turn off "EV-ness" of a CA's root cert for non-compliance with the standard
is a more credible threat than yanking the root from the browser and
frustrating millions of users.
OK, if you see this as central, then let's explore this more.
EV (just like SSL) bases on the idea that users will pay attention to
it, that they'll notice the change from usually green to now white when
doing online banking and be alerted and halt.
Now, how is that different from today? We're not (yet) stopping people
from going to SSL sites with an invalid cert, we show a dialog. Which
most people have no clue what it means and just dismiss and go on, see
it just as (popup) annoyance. If we "yank roots" today, people can still
go to the sites, they'll just get these alerts.
If you disable EV for a specific CA (could we do that), how is that
different from today? That the change is more subtle, less annoying.
But if people still go to sites, it means the EV UI is completely
ineffective. If they don't, we have the same or worse problem as today.
Note that in either case, we'll make a huge number of sites "invalid",
99% of which are legitimate and perfectly validated and correct.
--
When responding via mail, please remove the ".news" from the email address.
_______________________________________________
dev-security mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security
