Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> The way Firefox does it, is more to help companies sell certificates than
> to actually help security.
+1
All it does is it leads people to use completely unencrypted HTTP instead,
to avoid the "big scary warnings". How does that provide any added security?
I like the way Konqueror handles this: it does complain about self-signed or
otherwise invalid certs, but it allows you to accept them either temporarily
(for the duration of the session) or permanently in 2 clicks (one to accept
and one to choose whether to accept it for the session or forever).
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
