From: Bernd Jendrissek <bitcoin@bpj-code•co.za>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP70 proposed changes
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 01:41:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAF7PVPq+g98J-Q8Mssp5ap9cfrhPmwh91E8qn4gSEiHPApgx5g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140218214721.GA25356@savin>
[Ick, resending to list due to From: snafu]
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:47 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org> wrote:
> What specifically do you dislike about X.509? The technical standard or
> the infrastructure around it? (IE the centralized authorities)
I'm not the one who was complaining, but what I dislike is that a
certificate can have only one issuer. Cross-signing doesn't address my
dislike: it's different enough from being a certificate's single
issuer that it leaves too much power in the CAs' hands, IMHO.
It isn't so much the centralization per se that I object to, but the
way that the technical standard encourages concentration in the
infrastructure. See
http://lair.fifthhorseman.net/~dkg/tls-centralization/#Why_does_the_architecture_encourage_concentration%3F
I've been (slowly) working on a patch to allow pki_data to contain
more than just the single certificate chain that the
single-issuer-only format insists on, but I'm making as many steps
back as forward, being unsure of the right way to do it. Implementing
an OpenPGP-based pki_type would probably be better, but hacking x509+*
seems like a lower-hanging fruit.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-19 1:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-18 17:31 Andreas Schildbach
2014-02-18 19:14 ` Ryan X. Charles
2014-02-18 20:15 ` Gavin Andresen
2014-02-18 21:40 ` Andreas Schildbach
2014-02-19 14:10 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-02-19 16:44 ` Mike Hearn
2014-05-06 2:35 ` Odinn Cyberguerrilla
2014-05-06 8:22 ` Alon Muroch
2014-02-18 21:47 ` Peter Todd
2014-02-18 23:41 ` Bernd Jendrissek [this message]
2014-02-18 22:02 ` Derber
2014-02-21 15:34 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-05 10:18 ` Mike Hearn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAF7PVPq+g98J-Q8Mssp5ap9cfrhPmwh91E8qn4gSEiHPApgx5g@mail.gmail.com \
--to=bitcoin@bpj-code$(echo .)co.za \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox