- From: Yoav Nir <synp71@live.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 13:47:20 +0200
- To: "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 11:47:49 UTC
On 3/12/13 9:37 AM, William Chan (陈智昌) wrote: > > Now, as far case (2), if the proxy operators can already deploy their > MITM certs on client devices, then they already own those devices. > This sounds like enterprise computing devices or schools or prisons or > what not. Now, if they already own the devices on this network, what > incentive do they have to adopt explicit proxies? It sounds like they > would just lose power. Is there a carrot here? SSL MITM proxies are > already transparent to the client and origin server, so I don't see > what leverage either entity has here. > As a vendor of such solutions, I'll share with you the #1 complaint we get from customers: the green EV indication is gone. It's very likely that administrators are more concerned about EV than their users, but as it is, not letting the browser see the real server certificate is definitely not a good thing. Yoav
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 11:47:49 UTC