I've received lots of feedback to the effect that using the term "Trusted" for 
an app category does not clearly
communicate its purpose, especially relative to "Certified".  After discussions 
with the webapps PM team, Jonas and
Anant, I'm proposing that we use the term "Privileged" instead.  The consensus 
is that this is closer to describing the
purpose of this app category, while "trusted" (trust in general) is a user 
action not an application type. 

Other names that were discussed but decided against included:
"Reviewed" - While technically accurate at this time, this would lock us into a 
pretty specific (and limited)
methodology for validating these types of apps.  In the future apps stores 
could employ different techniques (strong
developer authentication and accountability, financial bonds, etc) that would 
result in equivalent security and privacy
properties to a review process.
"Signed" - This felt like the tail wagging the dog.  We determined the 
privileges necessary for this category of
applications first, then chose code integrity and authentication mechanisms 
commensurate to those (potential)
privileges.  It would also once again limit us to potential authentication 
approaches in the future.  Finally, it may be
confusing as signing alone generally does not permit additional privileges for 
desktop applications (outside of OS updates).

Yes, it sucks to bikeshed this at this stage of the game, but its better to 
bite the bullet and make the change now
rather than shipping with this terminology.  Speaking of bikeshedding, I know 
there are some strong opinions about the
need for a trusted app category, but this probably isn't the thread to reopen 
that discussion.  I'd like to focus on
quickly selecting the best term to describe it as currently defined 
(https://wiki.mozilla.org/Apps/Security).  Thanks,
  Lucas.

_______________________________________________
dev-webapps mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-webapps

Reply via email to