<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1dtr22xd42nv07un2xq0rmtkqkjylgsmexau0anxxafa9xmmn2ncshu7wrs</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1dtr22xd42nv07un2xq0rmtkqkjylgsmexau0anxxafa9xmmn2ncshu7wrs</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2011-12-19&#xA;🗒️ Summary of this message: Proposal to limit trusted CA certificates for Bitcoin client to those with good identity verification practices, but this may limit accessibility.&#xA;📝 Original message:On Monday, December 19, 2011 6:44:59 AM Andy Parkins wrote:&#xA;&gt; Perhaps we should be more strict about which CA certificates are trusted by&#xA;&gt; the bitcoin client: say restrict it to those who have demonstrably good&#xA;&gt; practices for verifying identity; rather than the ridiculous amount of&#xA;&gt; trust that comes pre-installed for me in my browser.&#xA;&#xA;Accepted CAs is/should be a property of your *operating system*, not any &#xA;particular software. Anyhow, restricting this further just makes it even more &#xA;unusable. Already there is only 1 or 2 CAs that will provide a gratis &#xA;certificate for personal/small users. If you only allow high-class CAs, I &#xA;imagine that will restrict &#34;no key in the URI&#34; aliases to those who will fork &#xA;over a lot of money.</html></oembed>