Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by naraniano 3196 days ago
Ah, so they are three days late. That doesn't sound too serious.
3 comments

On a requirement they voted for half a year ago for a standard specified 5 years ago. It's sloppy and sloppy is not a property you want in a certificate authority.
From experience working with them, sloppy is an excellent way to describe Comodo.
Three days is quite a long time to be late, so I'd hope someone over there is getting a reprimand, but yeah, it's also not a disaster. They're response and time to remedy this will be more telling I think.
Three days over a weekend, though. Context matters. Even if it's the most critical incident, you can't force employees to work outside of business hours.
The ballot was in March, so they have 6 month to prepare for it, not only 3 days to implement a surprising change.
Except they claimed to support it a long time before this. It’s not that they were late, it’s that they lied.
That makes no difference as to when the three days where. I never made any claims as to why it's late or them lying. I merely clarified that the three days were over a period where people don't usually work.
Karunamon et. al. are not saying your point is wrong; they are saying it is irrelevant, and if their facts are correct then they are right.
It's not about them being late these 3 days. It's about them lying about having already implemented this months ago.
How do you know they lied? What if they implemented it but simply did not flip the switch?
These 3 days don't matter when you have months of lead time.
I wonder about what else is Comodo being "not too serious" while they promise to be "super serious" about them in their marketing campaigns?