Hey there, Steve Holdoway wrote: > On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 20:57:48 +1200 > Christopher Sawtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] >> You see, I have at least met and vagely know the said Volker Kuhlmann, >> and although it's probably not much to do with being a CA he's got a >> great sense of humour. > That's the huge difference between the two. One says 'you can trust us, we > all know each other', and the other adds 'but if I've made a mistake, I > promise to pay you loads of money'
Who exactly is paying me a heap of money if they do a mistake? > > When securing your business identity online, which will you chose... even if > it may be an empty promise ( and I have no knowledge whether it is or not, I > hasten to add )? > > When I look at the cacert site, all I see is a front end to a number of > commonly available scripts, and well documented procedures. I just don't get > the difference between them doing it or me. Neither of us has any > accountability above saying oops if we're > wrong. For me it is important to send my credentials and privat data encrypted over the internet. So my host needs a certificate and I have to be able to identify/validate the certificate. Now I can differentiate between the host certificate and a malicious certificate (man in the middle attack), hopefully... thats all I need. And I think CAcert is a better approach than verisign, rsa and co. who take a lot of money out of our pockets... Cheers, Raffael
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
