Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 23, 2013
An "enum" for Python 3
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
In fact, it appears this ".secure" thing is mainly these guys attempting to replace the SSL CAs and monopolize that market.
This is only beneficial for mankind if they are indeed a better CA, and if their monopoly power is restricted either by themselves (with a legally binding pledge) or ICANN.
Unfortunately, I suspect these things aren't terribly likely.
.onion vs .secure
Posted May 13, 2012 23:28 UTC (Sun) by cmccabe (guest, #60281)
Which... actually might have some value. Of course, browser vendors would have to enforce the idea that only iSec partners could hand out certs for .secure, but that seems relatively straightforward.
The stuff about enforcing good site security among customers seems a little far-fetched. If some large bank hands them a fat sack of cash, is iSec really going to decline because their site missed a few best practices? It's kind of hard to believe.
Posted May 14, 2012 1:07 UTC (Mon) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458)
The whole "security certificate" stuff being what it is, anybody could just set up their own CA which undercuts prices for .secure (presumably by doing a clown's job on checking), so...
Wait, that is how this racket works today.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds