I think it's interesting how one of the main technical arguments for
denying DarkMatter's root inclusion request -- the misissuance of
certificates with 63-bit identifiers instead of 64-bit identifiers, also
affected Google, Apple and Godaddy, and to a much greater extent:
Dear Ryan,
In outlining the two paths that I presented at the end of my previous
email, I made sure to illustrate the choice between them as one that comes
repeatedly -- a conscious choice that every time produces a small,
incremental improvement, often through a tiresome and onerous process.
:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 2:15 PM Nadim Kobeissi via dev-security-policy <
> dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
>
>> Indeed I would much rather focus on the rest of the elements in the
>> Mozilla
>> Root Store Policy (
>>
>> http
ion for your continued engagement,
Nadim Kobeissi
Symbolic Software • https://symbolic.software
Sent from office
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 7:33 PM Ryan Sleevi wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 1:07 PM Nadim Kobeissi via dev-security-policy <
> dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> w
I would like to support the statements made by both Fabio and Scott to the
extent that if Mozilla is to go forward with this decision, then I fully
expect them to review their existing CAs and to revoke onto OneCRL every
one of them that has some news report of blog post linking them to
nefarious
his
> can't be considered credible.
>
> [1]
> https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/12/21/deep-pockets-deep-cover-the-uae-is-paying-ex-cia-officers-to-build-a-spy-empire-in-the-gulf/
>
> On 7/9/19 6:09 PM, Nadim Kobeissi via dev-security-policy wrote:
> > Dear Wayne,
> >
>
I wanted to supplement my previous email with an observation on how this
decision is already being covered by the same news outlet that are being
cited in the case against DarkMatter.
Reuters wrote this article:
Dear Wayne,
I fully respect Mozilla's mission and I fully believe that everyone here is
acting in good faith.
That said, I must, in my capacity as a private individual, decry what I
perceive as a dangerous shortsightedness and lack of intellectual rigor
underlying your decision. I do this as
That article doesn’t seem to say anything new about Dark Matter that hasn’t
been reported before, doesn’t present evidence and doesn’t cite sources.
Furthermore the article appears to allege that Dark Matter “discussed”
potentially targeting The Intercept, not that it “tried to hack several of
What a strange situation.
On the one hand, denying DarkMatter's CA bid because of these press
articles would set the precedent of refusing to accept the engagement and
apparent good faith of a member of the industry, based only on hearsay and
with no evidence.
On the other hand, deciding to move
On Thu, Mar 7, 2019, 4:29 PM Ryan Sleevi wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 10:18 AM nadim--- via dev-security-policy <
> dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
>
>> I think we're all choosing to kid ourselves here if we continue to say
>> that the underlying impetus for this discussion
11 matches
Mail list logo
