2 ms·

But vague accusations of government doing something bad are okay? Yes I am simply claiming that the current state of affairs is bad because google/mozilla/appl

• gruez 5y ago
  > But vague accusations of government doing something bad are okay? The government's past and current push to ban encryption (or similar efforts) aren't "vague". >Yes I am simply claiming that the current state of affairs is bad because google/mozilla/apple can go rogue and do bad things. I'm not claiming they necessarily are. But history teaches us that great power brings corruption, they aren't so much different from Microsoft some decades ago. You have to trust the browser makers regardless. If you want to prevent browser makers from going rogue (eg. sending your browsing data directly to them), you'd need far more comprehensive regulation than this. The only thing this does is force your browser to trust additional set of entities. In that respect, this legislation is quite pointless, because we haven't seen browser makers unfairly exclude upstart CAs. I suppose the regulation might be worth keeping around just in case, but I'm not really convinced of the cost/benefit. As I see it the benefit is that if browser makers decide to go rogue and exclude new CAs, this will allow EU and/or member states to issue their own certificates. The downside is that EU and/or member states can issue TLS certificates to MITM connections. Am I missing anything?