On 2005-02-14, Frank Hecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jean-Marc Desperrier wrote: >> http://thewhir.com/marketwatch/xra021105.cfm >> >> "Certificate authority XRamp (xramp.com) announced on Wednesday that it >> is now offering the industry's only 256-bit digital SSL certificates." > <snip> >> It doesn't seem their communication can be called anything but >> deceitful, and I'm seriously afraid mozilla.org must be very careful in >> order not to be seen as having endorsed it. > > How would mozilla.org (or, more correctly, the Mozilla Foundation and/or > the Mozilla project as a whole) be seen as having endorsed XRamp's > marketing claims? We simply approved their CA cert for inclusion [...] [snip]
I think you missed his point. If you look at the URL given, you can see that the Mozilla Foundation have apparently cooperated with the production of the XRamp press release, in order to make it a joint promotion for Firefox and XRamp certs. The XRamp press release notes that Mozilla Foundation is a customer of XRamp, and contains a quote: : "We're pleased to see XRamp offering 256-bit encryption for web : servers," said Mitchell Baker, President of the Mozilla Foundation. : "Firefox users can browse web sites with higher grade encryption : certificates with increased confidence." https://256.xramp.com/pr256.htm -- Michael _______________________________________________ mozilla-crypto mailing list [email protected] http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-crypto
