At 5:48 PM -0700 9/24/03, someone wrote:
The mystification of identity is a hallmark of any hierarchical
society.
Is this quote original with you? I like it enough that I want to
keep it around. I see you and others used similar variations before
in c'punks postings.
Yes. It's mine. The
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:33:56 -0700, thus spake Adam Back
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
: You'd have thought there would be plenty of scope for certs to be sold
: for a couple of $ / year. Eg. by one of the registrars bundling a
: cert with your domain registration. I mean if someone can provide DNS
:
Joel Sing wrote:
Hi Adam,
I believe they have, at least to a large degree. InstantSSL
(www.instantssl.com) sell 128-bit certificates for $49USD/annum.
Certainly far cheaper than the VeriSign or Thawte equivalent. This is
their 'base' level service which comes with a $50USD warranty, email
Ed Gerck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
PRICING STRATEGY: CAs should keep their prices high and find ways to add
price to current products (eg, offering insurance, different certificate
classes, benefits for CRL access, etc.) -- because the potentially difficult
mid-term future of such business impose
Why is it that none of those 100-odd companies with keys in the browsers
are doing anything with them? Verisign has such a central role in
the infrastructure, but any one of those other companies could compete.
Why isn't anyone undercutting Verisign's prices? Look what happened with
Thawte
At 1:15 PM -0400 9/24/03, Anton Stiglic wrote:
Interestingly, last time I checked, it was cheaper to buy from Thawte than
it was from Verisign directly.
Oh. That's easy.
The certificate doesn't say Verisign on it.
The mystification of identity is a hallmark of any hierarchical society.
Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why is it that none of those 100-odd companies with keys in the browsers are
doing anything with them? Verisign has such a central role in the
infrastructure, but any one of those other companies could compete. Why isn't
Adam Back wrote:
You'd have thought there would be plenty of scope for certs to be sold
for a couple of $ / year.
Excuse me? Why are they being sold per year in the
first place?
It's not as if there are any root servers to run!
Outrageous!
:-)
iang
Yes, there is a good reason for CAs to charge so much for certs.
I hope this posting is able to set this clear once and for all.
FOREWORD: It's often said that a good lawyer should be able to argue
both sides of an issue... Though I am not a lawyer, I believe it is
instructive to see things
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 05:40:38PM -0700, Ed Gerck wrote:
Yes, there is a good reason for CAs to charge so much for certs.
I hope this posting is able to set this clear once and for all.
[zero risk, zero cost, zero liability, zero regulatory burden]
9. Product Price: At Will.
There is no
Hi Adam,
That was my point and why I said I don't see any reason cert prices
with reasonable competition couldn't fall to a few dollars/year.
I believe they have, at least to a large degree. InstantSSL
(www.instantssl.com) sell 128-bit certificates for $49USD/annum. Certainly
far cheaper than
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4759214-103676,00.html
Guardian |
End of the line for Ireland's dotcom star
Software firm saw boom and bust; now the core business is sold
Geoff Gibbs
Tuesday September 23, 2003
The Guardian
Baltimore Technologies, the Irish software concern whose
At 01:06 PM 9/23/2003 -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4759214-103676,00.html
so ignore for the moment the little indiscretion
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#44 Proposal for a new PKI model (At
least I hope it's new)
hi
( 03.09.23 13:45 -0600 ) Anne Lynn Wheeler:
is it still possible to show that there has been long term,
continuous, non-stop, highest security custodial care of the GTE
cybertrust CA private keys. If there hasn't ... would anybody even
know?
i worked at cybertrust/baltimore up until
Lynn and John Saylior have raised an important point.
Who at Baltimore, or was once there, is likely to be able to
account for the security of the certs for customers who
still rely upon them? Not somebody to spin a fairy tale, but to
truthfully explain what Baltimore has done to avoid
At 12:45 PM -0700 9/23/03, Anne Lynn Wheeler wrote:
At 01:06 PM 9/23/2003 -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4759214-103676,00.html
so ignore for the moment the little indiscretion
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#44 Proposal for a new PKI model (At
least I
John Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Who at Baltimore, or was once there, is likely to be able to account for the
security of the certs for customers who still rely upon them? Not somebody to
spin a fairy tale, but to truthfully explain what Baltimore has done to avoid
betraying the trust of its
17 matches
Mail list logo
