resources: kerione-why-x509-certs-should-be-secondary-evidence
This data as json
| id | type | name | url | maintainer | status | last_checked | date | year | level | evidence | access | abstract | authors | series | chair | minutes | recording | media | decisions | version | language | license | release | pushed | depends | since | via | summary | note | has_abstract | has_summary | kind | sector | country | products |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| kerione-why-x509-certs-should-be-secondary-evidence | paper | Why X509 Certs Should Be Secondary Evidence of Org Identity | https://dhh1128.github.io/papers/x509-prob.html | Daniel Hardman | active | 2026-10-14 | practitioner | informative | public | A position paper by Daniel Hardman arguing that X.509 certificates should be secondary, not primary, evidence of an organization's identity, with ACDCs (Authentic Chained Data Containers) such as vLEIs carrying the primary weight. It works through mismatched lifespans, opaque governance, the post-quantum path, single-key signing, missing pre-rotation, unsequenced signatures, maintenance, revocation and scale. For practitioners choosing evidence for organizational identity. | Daniel Hardman | 1.4 (item CC-POS-241104) | keri-one-resources | research/papers/why-x509-certs-should-be-secondary-evidence | 1 | 1 |