[cabfpub] Chrome security warning discrepancy?

Moudrick M. Dadashov md at ssc.lt
Mon Jan 26 18:04:30 UTC 2015

Right, Tony. Two (more or less relevant) work items come to my mind here:


The "industry specification" looks more about behavioral aspects rather 
than UI design metaphors, right?


On 1/26/2015 5:57 PM, Tony Rutkowski wrote:
> No!
> You want a widely accepted industry specification,
> and this is exactly what the CA/B Forum exists for.
> If you look at the RSS Convention, it was done in
> 1968.  There appear to be only a few dozen signatories
> with many notable omissions.  Similarly, few nations
> even participate in the related body.
> For a browser security indicator, you couldn't even
> begin to get Nation States to discuss a subject
> that plainly is not properly a subject of public
> international law.
> The Forum should be pursuing and evangelizing
> its own work here rather than fantasizing over
> treaties.
> --tony, esq.
> On 2015-01-25 10:25 AM, Ben Wilson wrote:
>> Time for an international treaty on browser security indicators?
>> See 
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Road_Signs_and_Signals#Traffic_lights.
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> Public at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20150126/5def3383/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3653 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20150126/5def3383/attachment-0001.p7s>

More information about the Public mailing list