|
|
|
|
|
by hannob
2317 days ago
|
|
My personal take on this is that with easy automation wildcard certificates simply shouldn't be used any more. In the past one reason for wildcards was that it's too annoying to request certs for each subdomains. With automation this reason goes aways. The other reason is that you can have "secret hostnames". But if your security relies on secret hostnames that's a bad idea to begin with. You still leak the hostnames to the DNS and as long as we don't have ubiquitous DoH+ESNI also to the network. Wildcard certs on the other hand have certain risks. If you have a vulnerability in the TLS stack on subdomain1.example.org that may compromise the security of subdomain2.example.org if they share the same cert. |
|
You have a .example-usercontent.com wildcard certificate for domains like user-1234.example-usercontent.com and you have millions of users. A wildcard certificate is appropriate because:
* LetsEncrypt rate limits are a thing
* The domains exist to leverage origin sandboxing in browsers, but are served by the same infrastructure. It's not more secure (but it is more complicated) to have more certificates here.
Generally, the assumption that two subdomains are served by independent infrastructure is often wrong. Think of things like blogger.com/blogspot.com. So the concern about compromising keys doesn't really apply.