• conciselyverbose@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    Jesus.

    If you want to legally operate your browser in the EU, you have to blanket trust any certificate any member country wants you to with no security check of any sort that’s not explicitly approved by the EU.

    • Hirom@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I wonder if this would end up creating a second parallel PKI. The existing one used for HTTPS security based on Browser’s own trust decisions and CA-Browser forum guidelines. The EIDas one for a “government-approved” checkmark but that doesn’t make the website HTTPS nor have a secure icon.

      • 4dpuzzle@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are already multiple PKI stores on every system, managed by different entities. This is an attempt by demagogues to get around that problem using law to twist their arms.

        • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          He’s implying presenting it differently to the user: “secure” and “EU approved”.

          I’m assuming the EU will fight hard to prevent that though.

          • Tosti@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think the current legal text already disallows that. It will make everyone less secure.