Gervase Markham wrote:
> Ian Grigg wrote:
>
>>> This is clearly not the case - in partnership with the other browser
>>> vendors, we are together working out the most appropriate UI and then
>>> all implementing it.
That's fine, but of course not currently an open process.
Duane kindly setup an open forum, the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailing list. This is for anybody interested in further discussing these
issues; thanks! I am sure that some of the people in the `closed` group
will also join/follow the open forum, and certainly hope that Gerv will.
In particular, this list is an appropriate forum for feedback on our
proposal (TrustBar) and other proposals, for developing agreed-upon
criteria, etc....
For info or to join:
http://lists.cacert.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/anti-fraud
>> You (mozilla, you, everyone within) are not playing fair.
It is not an issue of fairness, it is an issue of open process. I am
indeed disappointed to find that Mozilla is not acting openly. As a
believer in open process, I am concerned that the result may be
suboptimal. This is not the way to encourage innovation.
Best, Amir Herzberg
See the new TrustBar homepage at http://AmirHerzberg.com/TrustBar
_______________________________________________
Mozilla-security mailing list
Mozilla-security@mozilla.org
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-security
