Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
As someone who is just planning to publish signed desktop software for Windows, this is deeply worrying. What reasons could there be for cancelling a certificate, especially when it has been used for years and the identity is already established?

Are there some ways to combat such decisions legally?

loading story #47690423
Realistically speaking - anything could be a reason. A shakedown or blocking based on some "nudge" (this might come across as tin-foiled though). Some flag/trip-wires going wrong, more worryingly due to a bug/false alarm - and this is more worrying because in this case semi-incompetent large orgs like MSFT find it really hard to accept it, fix, and move on. Some change in OP's account that either they don't see or haven't realised - some edge case, you never know.

And of course, it doesn't affect their earnings and there are no consequence, or significant, so they won't care and won't respond or tell what went wrong.

Can one move legally? Sure. But then it effectively is a combo of who blinks first and who can hold their breath longer.

This is a concern and risk that has realised itself multiple times over the past decades. There have been multiple stories linked to multiple developers in the past.

If you publish to any closed platform including ios, mac, win, android, this is the risk you run and a condition of operating you will need to accept.

loading story #47691893
There's more to it. Signed desktop software can be signed by any CA.

Veracrypt has kernel drivers. Microsoft's ability to control what you can sign is specific to kernel drivers, and Microsoft's trigger finger around bans exists in the world where bad drivers BSOD machines.

In general this isn't your problem.

loading story #47688719
loading story #47689214