Duplicate CA?

[David E. Ross]

When I use Certificate Manager to view CAs (the Authorities tab), I see
the following two (among other CAs):

TÜRKTRUST Bilgi İletişim ve Bilişim Güvenliği Hizmetleri A.Ş. (c) Kasım 2005

(c) 2005 TÜRKTRUST Bilgi İletişim ve Bilişim Güvenliği Hizmetleri A.Ş.

Are these two distinct CAs or merely different ways of presenting the
name of one CA?

--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

Are taxes too high in the U.S.? Check the bar graph
at <http://www.rossde.com/taxes/trickling.html> to see.

[Kathleen Wilson]

On 4/16/13 10:50 PM, David E. Ross wrote:
> When I use Certificate Manager to view CAs (the Authorities tab), I see
> the following two (among other CAs):
>
> TÜRKTRUST Bilgi İletişim ve Bilişim Güvenliği Hizmetleri A.Ş. (c) Kasım 2005
>
> (c) 2005 TÜRKTRUST Bilgi İletişim ve Bilişim Güvenliği Hizmetleri A.Ş.
>
> Are these two distinct CAs or merely different ways of presenting the
> name of one CA?
>

They are two distinct certs...

Issuer:
O = (c) 2005 TÜRKTRUST Bilgi İletişim ve Bilişim Güvenliği Hizmetleri A.Ş.
L = ANKARA
C = TR
CN = TÜRKTRUST Elektronik Sertifika Hizmet Sağlayıcısı
Not Before: (5/13/05 10:27:17 GMT)
Not After: (3/22/15 10:27:17 GMT)


Issuer:
O = TÜRKTRUST Bilgi İletişim ve Bilişim Güvenliği Hizmetleri A.Ş. (c)
Kasım 2005
L = Ankara
C = TR
CN = TÜRKTRUST Elektronik Sertifika Hizmet Sağlayıcısı
Not Before: (11/7/05 10:07:57 GMT)
Not After: (9/16/15 10:07:57 GMT)


They were both included as part of this bug:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=380635


Kathleen

[David E. Ross]

I did not ask if the certificates were duplicates. Obviously, they are
not.

I asked if the two certification authorities indicated by the
Certificate Manager are really the same. Are they really two different
organizations? Or is this a single certification authority with two
different names in the database?

If the latter -- one organization -- should not the certificates be
grouped together under either TÜRKTRUST Bilgi İletişim ve Bilişim
Güvenliği Hizmetleri A.Ş. (c) Kasım 2005 or else (c) 2005 TÜRKTRUST
Bilgi İletişim ve Bilişim Güvenliği Hizmetleri A.Ş? I would suggest the
former since it is strange to begin the name of a certification
authority with the copyright symbol.

[mert....@gmail.com]

Hi David,

As you have already mentioned, those were two different certificates issued by us. The reason that we have issued two certificates in a 6-month time was some modifications in extensions. We have used the copyright symbol as a prefix in the first one as a corporate-preference yet we have shifted it to the end in the latter one. Moreover, we have totally cancelled out the copyright character in our recent roots.

BTW, we are taking care such improvements in our future roots, as well.

Mert
TURKTRUST Inc.


24 Nisan 2013 Çarşamba 03:12:15 UTC+3 tarihinde David E. Ross yazdı:

[David E. Ross]

On 4/24/13 1:56 AM, mert....@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> As you have already mentioned, those were two different certificates
> issued by us. The reason that we have issued two certificates in a
> 6-month time was some modifications in extensions. We have used the
> copyright symbol as a prefix in the first one as a corporate-preference
> yet we have shifted it to the end in the latter one. Moreover, we have
> totally cancelled out the copyright character in our recent roots.
>
> BTW, we are taking care such improvements in our future roots, as well.
>
> Mert
> TURKTRUST Inc.
>
>

In other words: Yes, there is only one certification authority involved
with these two root certificates.

Would a bug report be appropriate to place both roots under one
authority (i.e., TÜRKTRUST Bilgi İletişim ve Bilişim Güvenliği
Hizmetleri A.Ş. (c) Kasım 2005)?

[Kathleen Wilson]

On 4/24/13 7:36 AM, David E. Ross wrote:
> In other words: Yes, there is only one certification authority involved
> with these two root certificates.
>
> Would a bug report be appropriate to place both roots under one
> authority (i.e., TÜRKTRUST Bilgi İletişim ve Bilişim Güvenliği
> Hizmetleri A.Ş. (c) Kasım 2005)?
>

The code simply uses the "O" of the Issuer field in the certificate. You
can see this by scanning through the other certs in the Certificate Manager.

Of course, you may file a bug to change this behavior, but it probably
won't be considered very high priority...

Kathleen