2 ms·
I agree with you conceptually, but it seems like everyone wants this and nobody doesn't want it, so as the lawyers sometimes say, "no harm, no foul". In partic
by schoen 6y ago
I agree with you conceptually, but it seems like everyone wants this and nobody doesn't want it, so as the lawyers sometimes say, "no harm, no foul".
In particular, the users of the Android devices want to continue to be able to access sites protected with Let's Encrypt, the site operators want to continue to allow this, Let's Encrypt wants to continue to allow this, and the auditors and root program operators decided that they don't consider it improper either.
You're right to describe it as an implementation flaw -- among other things, it removes the lever that root programs normally have to ensure continued compliance by CAs.
- stjohnswarts 6y agoThanks for the explanation. Sometime pragmatism has to overcome idealism/semantics to keep things moving.