Jump to content

Talk:EJBCA

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Primetomas (talk | contribs) at 16:41, 22 April 2021 (just remove the ref citations causing confusing refs to be displayed at the bottom of the Talk page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconJava Stub‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Java, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Java on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconComputing Stub‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Just announced to the community that it exists.. it would be nice to have a day or two to provide some more info..—Preceding unsigned comment added by ZeiZai6Y (talkcontribs) 09:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any sources other than the project's website? Any articles, news releases, etc? UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 12:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A good start but this article needs improvement

I like the fact that you put EJBCA in. But it currently rather reads like a catalog sheet than like a Wikipedia article.

  • You should make sure that every information has a notable source. Currently your article looks like original research
  • The whole overall context is missing: the history of EJBCA, the context where it is relevant.
  • Also critical reflections are needed. What are the weak points? Why are commercial systems still relevant? And sources, discussing it would make sense.
  • Are there notable examples, perhaps open source portals or big Cloud applications which use EJBCA

Thx for making it better

ScienceGuard (talk) 18:32, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1. The link to: A workflow based architecture for Public Key Infrastructure; Johan Eklund; TRITA-CSC-E 2010:047 Is dead, and KTH does not seem to keep an archive of these anymore. I suggest removing it. 2. In External links, only the first one should be kept imo (reverting my edit that added them). The others are linked from there, or already present in the article (github). I suggest removing the three links below the "official site".

COI: I am the founder of this opensource project Primetomas (talk) 05:51, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be good for the reader if See also linked to similar software such as let's encrypt (already present), OpenCA,DogTag,OpenXPKI, OpenSSL?

COI: founder of this open source project Primetomas (talk) 06:06, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, most links in See also are already in the text and could be removed right? Primetomas (talk) 06:09, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The links to similar software is already listed, with the exception of OpenXPKI, as "open source implementations" on the page Public_key_infrastructure, that have a more complete listing. Does that make it irrelevant here? Primetomas (talk) 06:22, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Primetomas: thanks for suggesting these edits. I will try to put in your edits later today under the process listed at WP:ER. In the future, please place a COI edit request here instead of a plain text talk page message to make it easier for other editors to incorporate your edits. Thanks, EpicPupper 20:41, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Edit request added as a new section. I added the plain text talk to get consensus/input before suggesting the edit. Primetomas (talk) 08:47, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request - See also

Please replace the contents of "See also" with:

Primetomas (talk) 08:45, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead: I have reviewed these proposed changes and suggest that you go ahead and make the proposed changes to the page. EpicPupper 18:38, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@EpicPupper: Implemented. Primetomas (talk) 06:16, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Remove redundant links from the External links section, leaving it with only one link:

Replace:

with:

  • No URL found. Please specify a URL here or add one to Wikidata.

Primetomas (talk) 08:52, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done Anton.bersh (talk) 06:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In "Further reading" remove the list item that is not available on-line anymore, "A workflow based architecture for Public Key Infrastructure"

In "Design", completely remove the documentation reference that moved and is incorrect: Automated and large scale operations

In Design completely remove the documentation reference that is just a link to product documentation: PKI Architectures

Primetomas (talk) 08:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I carried out these edits. Anton.bersh (talk) 09:47, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done EpicPupper 18:36, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request - Notable features edit #1

Please change:

  • Online Certificate Status Protocol: For certificate validation you have the choice of using X.509 CRLs and OCSP (RFC6960).

to

  • Online Certificate Status Protocol: certificate validation options include X.509 CRLs and OCSP (RFC6960).

Please change:

to

Please change:

  • PKCS#11 HSMs: Using the standard PKCS 11 API you can use most PKCS#11 compliant HSMs to protect the CAs’ and OCSP responders’ private keys.

to

  • PKCS#11 HSMs: Standard PKCS 11 compliant hardware security modules are used to protect the CAs’ and OCSP responders’ private keys.

Please change:

  • High performance and capacity: You can build a PKI with capacity of issuing billions of certificates at a rate of several hundreds per second.

to

  • High capacity: Using a standard RDBMS the system have a capacity to store large amounts of issued certificates.

Primetomas (talk) 09:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead: I have reviewed these proposed changes and suggest that you go ahead and make the proposed changes to the page. EpicPupper 18:37, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@EpicPupper: Implemented. Do you think this resolves the Grammatical person issue? Primetomas (talk) 06:21, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Primetomas: I will take a look at the article today and see if the issue is resolved. EpicPupper 16:14, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

History section discussion

For discussion:

ScienceGuard suggests above to provide some history "The whole overall context is missing: the history of EJBCA, the context where it is relevant".

Would a section similar to the History section in Let's_Encrypt be good and appropriate? Something like (meta code):

---

History and Usage

The EJBCA project was started in 2001 (ref to v1.0 release post) by Tomas Gustavsson. PrimeKey, the company maintaining the project today, was incorporated in May 2002.

It has since been used to issue digital certificates for different use cases including Academia (citation), Grid Computing (citation), Energy (citation) and (other use cases with citation).

Subsection: Notable Issues

The EJBCA software has been used during some publicly noted certificate related incidents (citation to Arstechnica and The register articles)

---

I think this will answer some questions about usage and history, as well giving some critical reflection. What do people think?

Primetomas (talk) 16:37, 22 April 2021 (UTC) (note COI)[reply]