<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/20/2015 12:50 AM, Ryan Sleevi
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACvaWvb-=aD9SW9aSrJzKdJ8X-G0wG0Butw-ZPfUSQvQvM01ZQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Indeed, I'd argue that the current EV lifetime is
one of the few things where EV <b>is</b> a security improvement
over DV/OV and thus potentially deserving of it's special UI
status. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Can you explain what the security risks would be as you perceive it,
if the lifetime would be increased to three years in particular for
EV?<br>
<br>
(Btw. I find the 27 and 39 month rather stupid, nothing prevents
from re-validating and issuing a certificate after 24/36 month. It's
just adding another 3 month to something that can done exactly the
same after two/three full years.)<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<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>
</body>
</html>