Ian G wrote, On 2009-01-05 11:28: > We know as a more or less accepted fact that the design of secure > browsing was for Credit Cards,
I believe that you've accepted that as fact. But PR and marketing is not design. It was designed for MUCH more than mere credit cards. > and the benefit there is solely for CC vendors, not consumers, because > the consumers are already covered by the $50 liability limit. They never > had any real concern whatsoever that anyone was reading their cc > numbers.) Only in the USA is that even close to true. And even in the USA, the damage caused by a stolen credit card is far broader than whatever monetary value the thief got with the stolen number. But that's somewhat moot because CCs are NOT and never were the sole reason for the design of SSL. (Did you read what I previously wrote about SSL vs SET?) _______________________________________________ dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
