You're disappointed by badly written viruses?

It was named by researchers after the files it creates , which are prefixed "~DQ".

I generally like the concept and can think of times in the past when I've preferred to receive an SSL certificate from someone else's perspective, rather than one my browser is simply prepared to accept without warning as it has been "appropriately signed". Monitoring such a system of notaries seems fairly trivial (they could monitor each other?) and could well prevent against the most targeted of attacks.

I have some reservations about notaries being privvy to my browsing history, although I guess local caching goes some way to mitigate this and I believe there are plans in place (or already implemented?) to bounce requests between notaries to add a layer of anonymity.

The main issue however with SSL and trust is the user. How many people still click to ignore SSL warning messages?