From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 17 12:47:52 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A41216A419 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:47:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from mail1.webmaster.com (mail1.webmaster.com [216.152.64.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05E8813C4EB for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:47:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from however by webmaster.com (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001813237.msg for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:37:47 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Tedm@Toybox. Placo. Com" Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:36:36 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Importance: Normal X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:37:47 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:37:47 -0800 Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:47:52 -0000 > Those payments are gigantic. Imagine for a second if Verisign > told Microsoft to kiss off, they were no longer going to pay > Microsoft for "renting" space in the IE root certificate store. > Microsoft would simply issue a root certificate revoke in Windows > Updates for the Verisign public key, and a few weeks later > millions of users would start getting messages that their browser > was no longer recognizing the SSL certificate from ebay, paypal, > Wells Fargo, etc. etc. Surely Microsoft could revoke keys out of any browser the same way. If the browser chose to use the Windows default key store, it would probably happen automatically. If not, nothing would stop the update from removing the certificate from whatever keystore other browsers use. > If by some miracle those millions of users were to manually add > those CA public keys into their root stores, Microsoft could merely > continue to periodically issue revokements. ;-) They could do this even to keys in Firefox, Netscape, or whatever other browser you use. > So now you maybe understand why Microsoft chose to crush Netscape, > and why they hand out IE like candy? Sorry, your argument makes no sense. More likely, Microsoft was afraid that a portable browser could become the platform of the future, making the operating system on longer particularly important. If that was going to happen, they had better be the market leader in the browser business. DS