RE: Logotypes in certificates

[Michael Zolotarev <[e-mail]>]

Though I don't favor including logotype or reference to a logotype to a
cert, considering it as a pure marketing trick (sorry, Stefan :), but my
realisation was that a logotype is by no means related to the establishment
of trust. It is 100% meant for a human eye only, and verification algorithm
should simply ignore it, as it ingores any other proprietory extentions. If
the verification comes up with an answer 'not validated', and the software
prompts a user saying 'couldn't validate', and the user still makes a
decision to trust the cert, it is an application's problem, which already
exists now, and logotypes add no extra pitch to it.

As an extreme, if a CA considers logotypes to be anyhow harmful, it simply
won't have a logotype in its own cert, and refuse certification of
logotypes.

Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: Ambarish Malpani [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 4:07 AM
To: 'Stephen Kent'; Dean Povey
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: Logotypes in certificates



Steve,
    This is the same argument as a CA issuing a cert to a
subordinate, who issues incorrect certificates with it - e.g.
issues a certificate for the domain www.amazon.com to say BN.

Either a CA controls/audits subordinate CAs, or has enough
reason to trust them, or the value of that hierarchy is
pretty useless.

I don't think logos in certificates affect this either way.

Regards,
Ambarish

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ambarish Malpani
Architect                                                650.567.5457
ValiCert, Inc.                                  [e-mail]
339 N. Bernardo Ave.                          http://www.valicert.com
Mountain View, CA 94043


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Kent [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 8:57 PM
> To: Dean Povey
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: Logotypes in certificates
> 
> 
> Dean and Stefan,
> 
> As a security kinda' guy, I always approach this from the "what will 
> the bad giy do" perspective.  From that perspective, I worry that a 
> TTP CA will cerfity company X, putting the company X logo in the 
> cert. Then company X will issue a cert to a subordinate CA, and put 
> in that cert an inappropriate logo. It is not realistic for an app to 
> display a chain of logos, and expect a user to pay attention, any 
> more that if one displayed a chain of DNs.  I still maintain that we 
> can agree on what would be a reasonable set of circumstances in which 
> the logo extension would be useful and safe, but I don't see a 
> technical means of enforcing these circumstances without changes to 
> the path validation algorithm. I am open to suggestions that provide 
> the necessary controls and don't have this unfortunate side effect, 
> but I have yet to see an example of such.
> 
> Steve
> 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended 
for the addressee(s) only.  If you have received this message in error or 
there are any problems please notify the originator immediately.  The 
unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is 
strictly forbidden. Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for direct, 
special, indirect or consequential damages arising from alteration of the 
contents of this message by a third party or as a result of any virus being 
passed on.

In addition, certain Marketing collateral may be added from time to time to 
promote Baltimore Technologies products, services, Global e-Security or 
appearance at trade shows and conferences.
 
This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by 
Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including
computer viruses.