[ntp:questions] Re: 4.2.1-RC

Per Hedeland per at hedeland.org
Sat Mar 25 12:13:44 UTC 2006

In article <T1143285006 at djwhome.demon.co.uk> david at djwhome.demon.co.uk
(David Woolley) writes:
>In article <e034cv$5b$1 at hedeland.org>, per at hedeland.org (Per Hedeland) wrote:
>> But there is obviously no way to establish that the claimed
>> counter-signatory isn't totally faked by just looking at the certificate
>Just for clarification, I was assuming in that paragraph that the 
>certificate chain was good, i.e. the browser had a copy of one of
>the certificates in the chain and it was marked good for the purpose
>for which it was used.

>I think Per and I actually agree.

Very much so (especially after the clarification:-) - I just thought
that your paragraph could maybe be (mis)read as implying that the
suggestion to "examine the self-signed certificate" would be meaningful

--Per Hedeland
per at hedeland.org

More information about the questions mailing list