Re: Discuss comments on draft-ietf-pkix-logotypes

[Margaret Wasserman <mrw@windriver.com>]

Hi Steve,

At 08:37 AM 9/18/2003 -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
> If you want an additional warning, I'm not going to object.  But it
> should be worded something like this:
>
>         As with all other fields in a certificate, logo information
>         MUST NOT be used until the validity of the certificate has been
>         successfully checked.

This statement would work for me.

Currently, the document says:

"It is thus imperative that the representation of any certificate
that fails to validate is not enhanced in any way by using the
logotype graphic unless an appropriate warning is given to the
end user."

...which I found pretty weak.

Are there any cases when a certificate that fails to validate
should be represented to the user without a warning?  This
paragraph implies that it is okay to do so, as long as the
logo information isn't displayed.

I also think that displaying a trusted logo (like the MS logo)
along with the warning message would actually make it _more_
likely that a user would ignore the warning and click "OK".

I'm not going to lose sleep over this, though, if our security
folks really think that what's in the current draft is adequate.

Margaret