You can have offline signatures in a design for a Stellar/Namecoin/EdDSA decentralized protocol. > How is it that centralized control is worse than the TLS's "

You can have offline signatures in a design for a Stellar/Namecoin/EdDSA decentralized protocol. > How is it that centralized control is worse than the TLS's "everybody has full power to impersonate you" decentralization? You know that Certificate Transparency is still subject to MITM attacks, right? It just makes it obvious that you were victim of one after the fact (if there is an "after the fact"). This is non sequitur. You're comparing a bad option where only a few can screw you over (DNSSEC) with a bad option where lots can screw you over (CAs). I want a protocol where no one can screw you over, except yourself. And I want the government to be powerless to do anything about it without your consent. And if it function with high anonymity (e.g. with Tor Hidden Services on servers purchased with cryptocurrencies), all the better.