x-x509-*-cert - Re: On the future of and application/x-x509-*-cert MIME handling

2015-09-08 Thread Henry Story
> On 4 Sep 2015, at 22:43, Martin Thomson wrote: > > Henry, I would rather you attempt to address Ryan's point 5, namely: > > 5) just generates keys, and relies on > application/x-x509-*-cert to install certificates. This MIME handling, > unspecified but implemented by major browsers, represen

Re: MD5 - Re: On the future of and application/x-x509-*-cert MIME handling

2015-09-05 Thread henry . story
> On 4 Sep 2015, at 22:43, Martin Thomson wrote: > Henry, I would rather you attempt to address Ryan's point 5, namely: > > 5) just generates keys, and relies on > application/x-x509-*-cert to install certificates. This MIME handling, > unspecified but implemented by major browsers, represents >

MD5 - Re: On the future of and application/x-x509-*-cert MIME handling

2015-09-04 Thread henry . story
On Thursday, 30 July 2015 01:35:52 UTC+2, David Keeler wrote: > [cc'd to dev-security for visibility. This discussion is intended to > happen on dev-platform; please reply to that list.] > > Ryan Sleevi recently announced the pre-intention to deprecate and > eventually remove support for the ele

Re: On the future of and application/x-x509-*-cert MIME handling

2015-08-31 Thread henry . story
On Thursday, 30 July 2015 20:32:07 UTC+2, Richard Barnes wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 6:53 AM, Hubert Kario wrote: > > > On Wednesday 29 July 2015 16:35:41 David Keeler wrote: > > > [cc'd to dev-security for visibility. This discussion is intended to > > > happen on dev-platform; please repl

Re: On the future of and application/x-x509-*-cert MIME handling

2015-08-31 Thread henry . story
On Thursday, 30 July 2015 12:34:30 UTC+2, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Teoli > wrote: > > Do you think it is already worth to flag it as deprecated in the MDN > > documentation as Google plans to remove it too? > > Yeah, seems worth a note at least given that Micr