On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 11:02 PM Remco Rijnders <re...@webconquest.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 10:27:24PM +0100, Stefan wrote in > <CAC6FiZ4uHas_Qz3UC-ixfe3hhGeBj5isp6OZ5Yvs=rrwlvm...@mail.gmail.com>: > >On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 10:16 PM Juergen Bruckner via Gnupg-users > ><gnupg-users@gnupg.org> wrote: > > > >Hi Juergen. > > > >> Your showcase with github.io also says nothing else than that Sequoia > >> considers an invalid certificate to be correct. That this happens in > >> audited software says just as much about the value of the audit. > > > >Please try to accept that GitHub's SSL cert is *valid*, or do you think > >that a CA certifies and invalid cert? > > It is not valid for the requested sub-sub-domain. Just as if you would hold my > passport, the passport itself might be valid, but it is not valid for you to > identify yourself with. > > That said, welcome to my kill file.
Interesting how you handle this thread (while I do not care to land in your kill file ...) Regards Stefan _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
