<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
On 04/12/2013 10:23 PM, From Rob Stradling:
<blockquote cite="mid:51685F3B.7020502@comodo.com" type="cite">Jeremy
wrote "The risk with long-term EV Code Signing certs is primarily
a loss of the private key, which is why we required a hardware
token."
<br>
<br>
I have to agree that "loss of the private key" is a significant
problem.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
There is no reason to deny it and I agree as well - however, were
those EV validated certificates (or validated to the same level)? In
my opinion there are a couple of problems for both sides with this
(hardware token) requirement which hinders adoption as well. Not
that we wouldn't favor everybody using some hardware token,
requiring is a problem.<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2">Regards </td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2"> </td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Signer: </td>
<td>Eddy Nigg, COO/CTO</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td> </td>
<td><a href="http://www.startcom.org">StartCom Ltd.</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>XMPP: </td>
<td><a href="xmpp:startcom@startcom.org">startcom@startcom.org</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Blog: </td>
<td><a href="http://blog.startcom.org">Join the Revolution!</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Twitter: </td>
<td><a href="http://twitter.com/eddy_nigg">Follow Me</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>