> That's why I claim that online revocation checking is useless - because it doesn't stop attacks. Doesn't mean there are "no" cases where it works. It just m

> That's why I claim that online revocation checking is useless - because it doesn't stop attacks. Doesn't mean there are "no" cases where it works. It just means any attacker dedicated enough can work around the CRLs. I don't see any reason why one should throw the baby with the water. In this case, I just see Chrome guilty of FUD and hiding behind an intractable problem to justify their incorrect position. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Generals'_Problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Generals'_Problem if you want to convince yourself the problem is intractable.