3 ms·
This would be a violation of root policies and would certainly cause the CA to be distrusted nowadays. It would also be detected with a high likelihood due to H
by pfg 9y ago
This would be a violation of root policies and would certainly cause the CA to be distrusted nowadays. It would also be detected with a high likelihood due to HPKP (and CT in the future). The economics of buying a CA for this purpose don't make sense.
- user5994461 9y agoYou might have missed yesterday's news from Chrome announcing that the HPKP feature is being considered for removal.
- pfg 9y agoThe deprecation timeline is being synced with the rollout of CT and CT enforcement headers (Expect-CT). This provides roughly the same detection (if not prevention) capabilities.
- criddell 9y agoWould it be a violation if a company or person were only using it to crack open traffic into or out of their network? On my network, shouldn't I be able to do just about anything I want?
- pfg 9y agoIt would be a violation to do it with Comodo's publicly-trusted PKI, yes. You can do whatever you want with a private root that's manually deployed to the clients within your network.