It's up. As you could see I created a "shared" account for the Savannah Hackers, if you want the password, mail me so I can send it securely.
-- Sylvain On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 01:28:32AM -0400, Michael Casadevall wrote: > I should note some Linux distributions, such as Debian and Fedora > include the CAcert root certificate so having it won't be quite so bad > as having just a totally self-signed certificate. > Michael > > On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Noah Slater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 10:55:10PM +0200, Sylvain Beucler wrote: > >> > I've put in the order for both savannah.gnu.org and savannah.nongnu.org. > >> > So I hope we'll get them soon. > >> > >> OK, there's a plan to use CAcert.org. I'd rather do instead of wasting > >> money on "trust". > > > > I agree that the whole SSL certificate industry is a farce, but > > unfortunately > > there doesn't seem to be any other option for improving the user experience. > > > > From the Wikipedia article on CAcert: > > > > As of 2005, certificates issued by CAcert are not as useful in web > > browsers as > > certificates issued by commercial CAs such as VeriSign, because most > > installed > > web browsers do not distribute CAcert's root certificate. Thus, for most > > web > > users, a certificate signed by CAcert behaves like a self-signed > > certificate. There was discussion for inclusion of CAcert's root > > certificate in > > Mozilla and derivatives (such as Mozilla Firefox) but it was closed without > > including it, at the end of April 2007. > > > > Given the low price of a "trusted" certificate, I would be interested to > > know > > how it could be considered an improvement on the current state of affairs. > > > > Best, > > > > -- > > Noah Slater, http://bytesexual.org/nslater > > > > > > >
