On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 8:14 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Without pinning, fraudulent certificates are invisible, especially when
>> applied to specific individuals. The fraudulent diginotar cerrtificates in
>> Iran would have gone unnoticed had it not been for the pinning of Google
>> certificates.
>
> The Google certs were not pinned. Pinning is a very specific mechanism.

We consider them to have been pinned. The dynamic pinning proposal in
the WebSec WG is a generalization of what we call "preloaded" (or
"static") pins.

Word-noodling aside, the attack might very well have remained
invisible without Chrome's knowledge of and insistence on Gmail's true
SPKIs.


-- 
They who can give up general-purpose computing to obtain a little
temporary safety, deserve neither general-purpose computing nor
safety.
_______________________________________________
therightkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey

Reply via email to