I just thought this group would be interested in following the thread on the
blink user group
"(Pre-)Intent to Deprecate: element and application/x-x509-*-cert MIME
handling"
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink-dev/pX5NbX0Xack
dropping those two features of the web
> On 22 Sep 2015, at 01:40, Geoffrey Keating wrote:
>
> Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes:
>
>> Consider a server has an ongoing session wrapped in TLS that uses client
>> authentication to approve or deny some requests from the client. It
>> remembers what requests the client has made as some sort
Hi,
I was reading with interest M. Thomson and M. Bishop's
"Reactive Certificate-Based Client Authentication" draft RFC [1].
In the section 2.3 "The CERTIFICATE_REQUEST Frame"
[[
CA-Count and Certificate-Authorities: "Certificate-Authorities" is a
series of distinguished names o
> What more do you think you need?
If that would allow one to specify that certificates that match a specific
IAN are acceptable and if those get implemented widely, then that's
what I was looking for.
Thanks. Look forward to that :-)
Henry
>
> -Ekr
>
>
> On Tue, M
Hi,
The W3C TAG is working on a finding for Client Certificates that
people here should find very interesting [1].
One issue that comes up a lot in discussions is the use of certificates
across origins [2], which some folks find problematic, even though it
clearly has its uses [3].
It seem
> On 9 Mar 2016, at 16:01, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> This is not a TLS WG issue.
Where should I go to post this question? Sorry I don't know the full ecosystem.
Henry
>
> -Ekr
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Henry Story <mailto:henry.st...@bblfish.n
27;t care what value of those are.
Is that allowed? I don't see anything regarding it when reading that section.
But
I may be missing something.
>
> -Ekr
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 12:22 AM, Henry Story <mailto:henry.st...@bblfish.net>> wrote:
> Hi,
>
