|
|
|
|
|
by RawInfoSec
3886 days ago
|
|
Plus lack of identity validation. While the author of the article minimizes this, we shouldn't remove it from the equation just because users can't tell the difference. The right thing would be to fix the users understanding rather than weaken the product. LetsEncrypt will be good for all those sites we deploy with self-signed certs, but won't be replacing major sites any time soon. |
|
Neither users nor browsers could tell whether a site is supposed to run a domain- or identification validated certificate. (Fun fact, HN uses a domain validated cert.) All you get is higher costs for some X.509 fields nobody ever looks at, and nobody would miss if an MITMing attacker replaced your ID validated cert with an domain validated one.