On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 23:06:08 +0930, Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > What really annoys me is when some fool thinks that getting a > certificate made out to www.example.com is fine when they try to use it > with mail.example.com, so I always see completely avoidable warnings. > If they'd had the sense to had a wild-card type of certificate made out > to just example.com, or had the certificate cover more than one > sub-domain, or created more than one certificate, things would just > work. The reason they don't get a wildcard cert or a CA cert is that CA's that have certs installed with the browsers charge more. They'd rather you'd pay them to sign your certificates rather than allow you to easily be your own CA for essentially the same cost of a single cert. The security benefit of doing that way is negligible. It's all about money. What Firefox (and other browsers) should be doing is treating https with a self signed cert the same as http. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
