- From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 13:00:47 -0500
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Lachlan Hunt" <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, "Thomas Phinney" <tphinney@adobe.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > This does nothing more than give us honest developers busy work while making > the font foundries have warm fuzzy feelings knowing their fonts are 'safe', > when they are anything but no matter *what* we do (short of > cryptographically signing the fonts...). Cryptographically signing the fonts wouldn't do anything except reliably indicate that you claim they belong to you (or otherwise endorse their contents somehow, depending on the semantics of the signature). Anyone could still remove the signature at any time, or replace it with their own, so it provides no safety. Nothing will as long as users have full control over their machines: you need working, effective chains of trust from the hardware level up to have any kind of security that a hacker can't break with a little effort. Thankfully, we don't seem likely to get that anytime soon.
Received on Friday, 7 November 2008 18:01:26 UTC