Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by e_d_e_v 3081 days ago
So would a whitelist of providers/ip's be sufficient? Whitelists can be much easier to maintain.
1 comments

It may make sense as a stopgap measure.

Even then, you have a CA sticking out its neck on the assurances of a web host that isn't accountable to the root programs and isn't accountable to the CAB Forum.

If that web host swears they don't have the issue, LE tests them, whitelists them, and then subsequently... at a customer request or just to be nasty the web hosts reverts and allows this exploit, the web host won't be held accountable. The CA will.

Ok, in this scenario, we have a web host with an adversarial entity on its server, that commits a crime.

By the same token, if that web host were hacked and used to obtain a nefarious certificate, would the CA be accountable? It seems to me that, as a customer, if you point your domain (which you must do somehow) at a hosting provider, then any DV issued with that hosting providers' infrastructure should be considered to be the responsibility of the hosting provider and domain owner. I think you and rgbrenner are making perfectly valid points for high-value infrastructure, which has in my view very little to do with these hosting providers. The fact that people can upload certificates at all for domains which they have not proved (to the hosting provider) ownership of is disturbing in and of itself, even if it is quite common.