Hi Justin! Justin Karneges schrieb: > The XSF runs an ICA, but that alone is not enough of a reason for XMPP > developers and users to trust it. The reason the XMPP ICA is interesting is > because it is under StartCom control, and StartCom is widely trusted. To > better understand what I mean, just imagine if the XMPP CA was an independent > root CA. The value comes not from the XSF's booming voice, but from > StartCom. :)
> Anyway, there's nothing wrong with having a recommendation, and I see you've > already published new versions of the XEP with it. However, it does come off > as an advertisement, which is a strange thing to have in a XEP. You could > just as well advertise Equifax, I'm sure they have a number of XMPP domain > certificates issued too. > > Right, bundling does have value. The Psi 0.11 release candidate ships the > StartCom root, for example. However, Psi only does this because Mozilla does > this. Really, it is important here to realize who is in a position to vouch > for trust. XSF and Psi are unable do this, but the Mozilla Foundation is, > and so that's the authority Psi draws from, *not* any XSF recommendation. +3 ... one for each chapter ... While I do bundle the StartCom root certificate with jabberd14 as well, I also do not do this because of any XEP. Me as well, I would consider it at least very strange if any XEP advertizes or recommends any certification authority. You also won't find any recommended CA in RFC 2818 (HTTP over TLS). Matthias -- Matthias Wimmer Fon +49-700 77 00 77 70 Züricher Str. 243 Fax +49-89 95 89 91 56 81476 München http://ma.tthias.eu/
