- From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
- Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:55:56 +0200
- To: "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com>
- CC: Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, patrick mcmanus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 3/26/12 11:22 AM, Adrien W. de Croy wrote: > > ------ Original Message ------ From: "Peter Saint-Andre" > <stpeter@stpeter.im> To: "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com> Cc: > "Mike Belshe" <mike@belshe.com>;"Roy T. Fielding" > <fielding@gbiv.com>;"patrick mcmanus" > <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>;"ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> > Sent: 26/03/2012 10:03:30 p.m. Subject: Re: SPDY = HTTP/2.0 or not > ? On 3/26/12 10:56 AM, Adrien W. de Croy wrote: > > >>>>> >>>>> From a practical point of view, there aren't a lot of >>>>> alternatives to SSL on the table right now. Most people do >>>>> agree that SSL does a reasonable job of preventing >>>>> eavesdropping. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I can see a lot of resistance from customers told they now >>>> need to buy and maintain a certificate from a CA just to run >>>> a webserver. >>>> >>>> Sure they can run a self-signed cert, but that doesn't fulfil >>>> the goal of giving the user security. >>>> > > > Could we cut the FUD about needing to pay for certs? There are > indeed providers of free certificates (I won't mention names for > fear of being tarred with a marketing brush). > > >> providers of free certs who > >> a) verify the identity of the entity they issue the certificate >> to b) have a root cert that's sufficiently well deployed and >> trusted to be usable > >> ? I'd be keen to know more. > >> if not a (which is incompatible with free) then is it really >> security? You can check the cert at the URL in my sig. > And SSL/TLS is not *necessarily* tied to PKI, either. > > >> OK. so no private key? Just some shared secret then? See for example the DANE WG: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dane-protocol Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk9wPSwACgkQNL8k5A2w/vwUXwCgkMGTKxKbRqiK8mBJi9izlkzi djQAoLXQzTsvRCVRq1CJTqpfiVQRUoHM =LE6/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Monday, 26 March 2012 09:56:32 UTC