This company only cost £10. £6 for the incorporation. £4 for sending in
NE01 form to Companies House.
On Mon, 4 Jun 2018 at 08:58, Jeremy Rowley via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
> Punctuation differences are not enough to register a name in the us, or at
>
Punctuation differences are not enough to register a name in the us, or at
least in the jurisdictions here I’m aware of.
> On Jun 4, 2018, at 1:04 AM, Ryan Hurst via dev-security-policy
> wrote:
>
> I apologize, I originally wrote in haste and did not clearly state what I
> was suggesting.
I apologize, I originally wrote in haste and did not clearly state what I
was suggesting.
Specifically, while it is typical for a given jurisdiction (state, etc) to
require a name to be unique, it is typically not a requirement for it to
not be so unique that it can not be confused for another
On 6/1/18, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Peter Kurrasch wrote:
>
>> Security can be viewed as a series of AND's that must be satisfied in
>> order to conclude "you are probably secure". For example, when you browse
>> to an important website, make sure that "https" is used
Matthew Hardeman writes:
>>On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:38 PM, Peter Gutmann
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Banks, trade vendors, etc, tend to reject accounts with names like this.
>>
>>Do they?
>>
>>https://www.flickr.com/photos/nzphoto/6038112443/
>
>I would hope that we could agree that there is generally a
I've spoke with a few UK banks about a opening bank account for ";" and
they are happy to proceed.
James Burton
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 11:58 PM Matthew Hardeman
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:38 PM, Peter Gutmann
> wrote:
>
>>
>> >Banks, trade vendors, etc, tend to reject accounts
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:38 PM, Peter Gutmann
wrote:
>
> >Banks, trade vendors, etc, tend to reject accounts with names like this.
>
> Do they?
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/nzphoto/6038112443/
I would hope that we could agree that there is generally a different risk
management burden in
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 10:28 AM, Ryan Hurst via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
>
> re: Most of the government offices responsible for approving entity
> creation are concerned first and foremost with ensuring that a unique name
> within their jurisdiction is
security-pol...@lists.mozilla.org
> Subject: Re: Disallowed company name
>
> On Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 3:07:36 PM UTC-7, Matthew Hardeman wrote:
> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Peter Saint-Andre via
> > dev-security-policy < dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote
-security-pol...@lists.mozilla.org
Subject: Re: Disallowed company name
On Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 3:07:36 PM UTC-7, Matthew Hardeman wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Peter Saint-Andre via
> dev-security-policy < dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
> >
> &g
On 6/1/18 10:04 AM, Ryan Sleevi via dev-security-policy wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Peter Kurrasch via dev-security-policy <
> dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
>
>> Security can be viewed as a series of AND's that must be satisfied in
>> order to conclude "you are
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Peter Kurrasch via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
> Security can be viewed as a series of AND's that must be satisfied in
> order to conclude "you are probably secure". For example, when you browse
> to an important website,
On Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 3:07:36 PM UTC-7, Matthew Hardeman wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Peter Saint-Andre via dev-security-policy <
> dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > We can also think of many business types (e.g., scammers) that would
> > love to have
Regarding the options listed, I would agree with the first 2 but disagree with the third.My characterization of this situation is as follows:1. Trust is not granted to everyone. This is true in virtual realms as
Matthew Hardeman writes:
>I wonder if you've ever annoyed a taxing authority? They have far less humor
>than one might imagine.
I used to have the account name administrator@, after trying
various SQLI@ names and being somewhat disappointed that no
fireworks ensued. They were rather amused,
Matthew Hardeman writes:
>On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 5:03 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>
>> New business enterprise name: ';UPDATE TAXRATE SET RATE = 0 WHERE NAME =
>> 'EDVIN SYSE'
>
>That's hilarious. Where I'm from they'd accuse you of attempting to hack
>them, though likely not actually
Matthew Hardeman writes:
>Banks, trade vendors, etc, tend to reject accounts with names like this.
Do they?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nzphoto/6038112443/
Peter.
___
dev-security-policy mailing list
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
*Some cas. I don’t think the 18 month requirement is a universal position and
may not even be a majority view. I think there’s other ideas that are better
and add more value than simply extending the time a company is required to
exist to get the cert.
> On May 31, 2018, at 4:40 PM, Wayne
On 06/01/2018 12:14 AM, Matthew Hardeman via dev-security-policy wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 5:03 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand
> wrote:
>
>>
>> New business enterprise name: ';UPDATE TAXRATE SET RATE = 0 WHERE NAME =
>> 'EDVIN SYSE'
>>
>> they have a write-up on it on
>>
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:39 PM James Burton via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
>
> This is wrong and should be changed to allow all types of legally
> incorporated company names to get certificates. I understand this
> doesn't fit any of the standard company
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 5:03 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand
wrote:
>
> New business enterprise name: ';UPDATE TAXRATE SET RATE = 0 WHERE NAME =
> 'EDVIN SYSE'
>
> they have a write-up on it on
> https://blogg.syse.no/syse-data-og-bronnoysundregistrene/ in Norwegian,
> although you'll find
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Peter Saint-Andre via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
>
>
> We can also think of many business types (e.g., scammers) that would
> love to have names like ⒶⓅⓅⓁⒺ but that doesn't mean it's smart to issue
> certificates with such
On 05/31/2018 11:54 PM, Matthew Hardeman via dev-security-policy wrote:
> I wonder if you've ever annoyed a taxing authority? They have far less
> humor than one might imagine.
>
> Just because you've formed a legal entity with such a name does not mean
> that others will regard it with
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:38 PM, James Burton via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
>
> I recently incorporated the company named ";", see:
> https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11363219. This company
> compiles with
> the both the "Companies Act 2006" and
On 5/31/18 2:38 PM, James Burton via dev-security-policy wrote:
> I posted this also on the CAB Forum validation mailing list but I think
> it's worthy of discussion on both lists.
>
>
> I recently incorporated the company named ";", see:
> https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11363219.
I posted this also on the CAB Forum validation mailing list but I think
it's worthy of discussion on both lists.
I recently incorporated the company named ";", see:
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11363219. This company compiles with
the both the "Companies Act 2006" and "The Company,
26 matches
Mail list logo
