Ok, QuickSSL and ChainedSSL are both owned by Geotrust.

However, the lower end cert. (ChainedSSL) has a higher browser ubiquity (I know this is because they are chained to the Baltimore root which has a higher ubiquity then Geotrusts own root)

However, my question is: Is there any disadvantage to being chained to another root? I know that it might be an extra step during the install process... but once it is up and running, is there any disadvantage?

I ask because I am just about to get one of these certs for a client of mine. Since my client uses I.E. 5.0 on Win2000, it pretty much rules out QuickSSL, which won't work with I.E. 5.0. (I can't even browse the Geotrust website with I.E. 5.0)

Also, does anybody know of any other certificates that will work with I.E. 5.0, costs less than $75.00 and preferably has an automated provisioning process. (don't want to wait two days for the Instant SSL cert)

Thanks

-Fractal

ok, the Geotrust cert now costs $25.00 from RS. A great Deal!

Order is restored in the universe again... (see above post)

-Fractal


btw. I found out their are no technical disadvantages to having a chained cert. There are, however, some branding disadvantages. (less brand name recognition of cert etc...)