It's actually kind of unfortunate, as in some ways an organization's name is a much more meaningful expression of identity than a domain name is. When I visit the website for my bank, I don't really care that the entity I'm communicating with owns "mybank.com". What I, and I suspect most people, are really concerned with is that the entity they're communicating with is the same physical, real-world organization they opened a bank account with in the past.
The problem is that legal corporation names are much harder to verify than domain names, and even once verified they don't always match user expectations (as Ian Carroll so aptly demonstrated with his Stripe Inc. certificate). Furthermore, and perhaps partially as a result of the aforementioned issues, browsers don't treat EV certificates in a way which would allow any meaningful security guarantees to be built on top of them.
I wonder if there are ways this situation could be improved. Brand names, for example, are probably more likely to match user expectations than legal company names. Perhaps an alternative to EV could be built around that idea.
The problem is that legal corporation names are much harder to verify than domain names, and even once verified they don't always match user expectations (as Ian Carroll so aptly demonstrated with his Stripe Inc. certificate). Furthermore, and perhaps partially as a result of the aforementioned issues, browsers don't treat EV certificates in a way which would allow any meaningful security guarantees to be built on top of them.
I wonder if there are ways this situation could be improved. Brand names, for example, are probably more likely to match user expectations than legal company names. Perhaps an alternative to EV could be built around that idea.