Your quote of Lapcatsoftware is just wrong. It is not:
> Apple is to blame for revoking this certificate.
It is:
> So blame must be apportioned to both companies.
...because the revocation itself seems to have been an unjustified request.
It seems the value-add of Apple having the sole ability to revoke certificates would be that they could avoid something like this. (That said, I do think this is still mostly HP's fault, but the article raises a point that is more valid than implied.)
> Apple is to blame for revoking this certificate.
It is:
> So blame must be apportioned to both companies.
...because the revocation itself seems to have been an unjustified request.
It seems the value-add of Apple having the sole ability to revoke certificates would be that they could avoid something like this. (That said, I do think this is still mostly HP's fault, but the article raises a point that is more valid than implied.)