SSL Certs. Confusion marketing?

Given that the ultimate purpose of encrption is to protect data in transit from prying eyes, does it really matter whose brand label is on the SSL cert?

In any event, all SSL certs appear to be 128-bit, with some claiming "compatibility" with more browsers than others. Surely that's a problem for browser makers. Even so, if a given browser does not recognise a secure connection, that does not mean the connection is not secure. ie If a blind man can't see a padlock, the padlock does not cease to exist.

Here are some examples from EV1, all of which look as secure as each other to me:

Starter SSL $4.95 - IE 5.01+, AOL 5+, Netscape 7+ and Opera 7.53+

Chained SSL $19.95 - IE 5.01+ and AOL 5+

Quick SSL $49.00 IE 5.01+ and AOL/Netscape 4.51+

One could legitimately ask the question "Is Quick SSL 10 times better than Starter SSL?"

Is it me, or is all this hype about SSL certs a perfect example of latter-day confusion marketing?

Ulysses

 

 

 

 

Top