Skip to main content

Gossiping in CT

Document Type Expired Internet-Draft (trans WG)
Expired & archived
Authors Linus Nordberg , Daniel Kahn Gillmor , Tom Ritter
Last updated 2020-02-25 (Latest revision 2018-01-14)
Replaces draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct
RFC stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Intended RFC status Experimental
Additional resources Mailing list discussion
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Melinda Shore
Shepherd write-up Show Last changed 2017-03-16
IESG IESG state Expired (IESG: Dead)
Action Holders
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD Roman Danyliw
Send notices to "Melinda Shore" <>

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:


The logs in Certificate Transparency are untrusted in the sense that the users of the system don't have to trust that they behave correctly since the behavior of a log can be verified to be correct. This document tries to solve the problem with logs presenting a "split view" of their operations or failing to incorporate a submission within MMD. It describes three gossiping mechanisms for Certificate Transparency: SCT Feedback, STH Pollination and Trusted Auditor Relationship.


Linus Nordberg
Daniel Kahn Gillmor
Tom Ritter

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)