Policy-Discussion

[Duane <duane AT cacert.org>]

Sven Anderson wrote:

> It is not for penalty, it just to limit the risk for the assurer. Else I
> would agree. But how someone can rely on certificates, were you first have
> to find out, how much the involved assurers earn?

I thought the discussion was on gross negligence, in which case 
penalising someone for misconduct is appropriate. In the case of good 
fake documents I doubt it's suitable to have the person liable at all.

--

Best regards,
 Duane

http://www.cacert.org - Free Security Certificates
http://www.nodedb.com - Think globally, network locally
http://www.sydneywireless.com - Telecommunications Freedom
http://e164.org - Because e164.arpa is a tax on VoIP

"In the long run the pessimist may be proved right,
    but the optimist has a better time on the trip."