Re: Draft Charter

[Stephen Kent <kent@xxxxxxx>]

> ...
> I think what's typical for an Enterprise depends on the application. 
> If we're talking about browsers, then I think it's perfectly 
> acceptable to have two TAAs - one from the browser vendor (it 
> shouldn't be my employer's task to tell me that Verisign has a new 
> root CA certificate - that's Microsoft's job) and the other being 
> the corporate IT department. That's why I think each TAA should be 
> able to manage its own (and only its own) trust anchors.

Even in this case I can see problems, I think several folks have 
noted that the default TAs currently installed in browsers ought to 
be subject to local management, especially deletion! So, as a browser 
user in an enterprise context, I would not want a TAA installed by MS 
(or, in my case, Apple) to be able to maintain the presence of TAs 
even if my IT dept wants to remove them.

> In your consumer space example, I again don't think SalesForce.com 
> should be able to delete bankofamerica.com's trust anchor. Perhaps 
> there should be exception, such as if Microsoft learns that the 
> bankofamerica.com TA really belongs to a phishing company, but I 
> think each TAA should manage its own as a general rule, and this 
> should be enforced.

This example seems to suggest that a home user might have lots of 
TAAs, not just a lot of TAs. I'd worry that the result would be 
unmanageable for most home users. Did I misunderstand your example?

Steve