Indeed...

Yes, of course. They wouldn't budge. Their suggestion: just use the "free" plan instead, there you can wear as many hats as you like (which I did... after this incident they never saw another cent from me). Weird way of promoting your business...

And that's another issue: they don't take any suggestions! For example: some (all?) of their automated mails are formatted as a single long line. I suggested to them that general usage is to stay below 78 characters per line. Should be easy to fix, as they probably use some kind of .txt template, where they could just insert a couple of breaks. Answer: well, at least our mails don't contain a virus (or something equally silly). Hey that's great! But it would be even nicer if the lines were shorter as well. A year afterwards, the issue was still not fixed.

Well, it's not commercial use, it's for several non-profits and one political party.

Yeah, that's the kind of certificate that you can for free from StartSSL (class 1)

Yeah, that would be reasonable. Can these domains be wildcard, or does each domain only have a single host?

Interesting...

I know. So expensive that people cannot even afford mustard to put on their sausage along with it ...

The terrorist could conceivably kill you in your sleep, with a single shot at your head through your pillow...

Only when the attacker is sitting on the path from the browser to the server. Not when listening in on the side-lines.

... and sitting on the path is the exact definition of man-in-the-middle, which allows to take advantage of poor certificates. And how many people properly understand certificates?

Exactly. And once users are trained to ignore warnings, they will ignore them too if they are about bad certificates, so nothing is gained (see above).

And if you do pay the $60, you can only manage a single legal entity. Which means, if you are the certificate manager of some organization, you can either get certificates in the name of that organizationation (after completing the paperwork and paying the additional $60), or for your own private sites, but not for both at once. Yes, after completing the paperwork for getting certificates for your organization, you lose the right to get certificates for yourself. Crazy, but true!

Oddly enough, if you don't pay anything at all ("class 1 certificates"), you can get certificates for several associations and yourself at once. Of course, then you can't get wildcards or SAN certificates, so you are forced to use SNI (more hassle to set up, and might not work with exotic browsers).

Wow, a place where beer is even more expensive than here in Luxembourg! But seriously, I guess the $9/year is for plain certificates, no wildcard and non SAN? In that case it would compete with StartSSL's free offering, rather than their $60 plan. If it actually does include wildcard certificates, I would be interested in details.

... an educated and trustworthy third party. And that's where it becomes difficult...

I hope so too. That way, the hackers will release the files (the contents, not just the filenames), which contain enough juice to sink Sony Pictures (and possibly other parts of Sony too) for good.

Are you sure these are appropriate jobs for Sonyscum? Personally, I wouldn't want to eat burgers laced with exlax, or sushi caught from the waters next to Fukushima...

Yeah, but you forgot an important detail... The suggestion was not just to plug it in to another computer, but to plug it into another computer that isn't yours. In case it does becomes infected, you just sneak away, and pretend that nothing happened...

But only if you're a boy. If you're a girl, you just keep sitting next to it and weep...

A couple of years back, the French complained that a new wind turbine field in Germany was spoiling the nice scenic view of the Chateau de Malbrouck (located just opposite the German-French border from that infamous field).

Unfortunately, they conveniently completely forgot what the Germans see when they look at the Chateau de Malbrouck

But he did:

So, what's your point?

Just looking at a map, while coming from North I-65 and going east on I-10 looks kinda nonsensical, going west doesn't look so bizarre. You'd use that connection when going from Montgomery to New Orleans, wouldn't you?

Or is that just a general comment that those roads tend to be congested, and are never the quickest way (no matter which way you turn?)