this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2024
358 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

59969 readers
4334 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 486@lemmy.world 108 points 2 days ago (9 children)

I understand their reasoning behind this, but I am not sure, this is such a good idea. Imagine Letsencrypt having technical issues or getting DDoS'd. If the certificates are valid for 90 days and are typically renewed well in advance, no real problem arises, but with only 6 days in total, you really can't renew them all that much in advance, so this risk of lots of sites having expired certificates in such a situation appears quite large to me.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 18 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That's true, but it would also have to be a serious attack for LE to be down for 3 entire days. There are multiple providers for automated certs, so you could potentially just switch if needed.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The attack would only need to last for a day or two, and then everyone requesting updated certs when it stops could push enough people outside the 6-day window to cause problems. 6 days is probably long enough to not be a huge issue, but it's getting close to problematic. Maybe change to 15 days, which should avoid the whole issue (people could update once/week and still have a spare week and a day to catch issues).

[–] derpgon@programming.dev 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Most companies are not really suited for instant switching to a different cert service.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 90 points 2 days ago (15 children)

When I look at the default list of trusted CAs in my browser, I get the feeling that certificate lifetimes isn't the biggest issue with server certificates.

[–] errer@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago

The sites I have most frequently have had to add expired certificates to use are US government websites. Particularly those affiliated with the military branches. It’s sad.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 25 points 2 days ago

People who'd abuse trust into centralized PKI system are not real, they can't hurt you, because if they abuse it, said system's reputation will fall to zero, right?

Except it's being regularly abused. LOL. And everybody is using it.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] jdw@links.mayhem.academy 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (6 children)

Don’t certs just create an ephemeral key pair that disappears after the session anyhow? What does cert validity period have to do with “This is a big upgrade for the security of the TLS ecosystem because it minimizes exposure time during a key compromise event.”

I mean, it’s LE so I’m sure they know what their talking about. But…?

[–] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 1 day ago

The key pair you're thinking of is just a singular key for a block cipher. That key needs to be generated/transmitted in a secure manner. Meaning that its security is dependent on the cert. The expiration time of that cert is what they're aiming at.

[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 day ago (5 children)

I'm far from an expert on PKI, but isn't the keypair used for the cert used for key exchange? Then in theory, if that key was compromised, it could allow an adversary to be able to capture and decrypt full sessions.

[–] snowfalldreamland@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago

Im also not an expert but i believe since there Is still an ephemeral DH key exchange happening an attacker needs to actively MITM while having the certificate private key to decrypt the session. Passive capturing wont work

[–] TheKMAP@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 1 day ago

Have you read about perfect forward secrecy?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Laser@feddit.org 16 points 2 days ago

It's kind of in line with their plan to get rid of OCSP: short certificate lifetimes keep CRLs short, so I get where they're coming from (I think).

90 days of validity, which was once a short lifetime. Currently, Google is planning to enforce this as the maximum validity duration in their browser, and I'm sure Mozilla will follow, but it wouldn't matter if they didn't because no provider can afford to not support chromium based browsers.

I was expecting that they reduce the maximum situation to e.g. 30 days, but I guess they want to make the stricter rules optional first to make sure there are no issues.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Interesting. I use LetsEncrypt largely for internal services, of which I expose a handful externally, and I've been thinking of only opening the external port mapping for cert renewals. With this at 90 days, I was planning on doing this once/month or so, but maybe I'll just go script it and try doing it every 2-3 days (and only leave the external ports open for the duration of the challenge/response).

I'm guessing my use-case is pretty abnormal, but it would be super cool if they had support for this use-case. I basically just want my router to handle static routes and have everything be E2EE even on my LAN. Shortening to 6 days is cool from a security standpoint, but a bit annoying for this use-case.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] M33@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Digicert, Sectigo, Globalsign: hold my beer, 1 day certificate, even better: on the fly certificate per client 😂

[–] AAA@feddit.org 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] M33@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Free has zero value in the enterprise world if managing certificates is a nightmare. Certificate prices is insignificant when your average website is a 90.000€ project.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I wonder how short this could conceivably go…

[–] Rivalarrival 27 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Dynamic generation. There is no certificate until user request.

[–] groet@feddit.org 25 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Perfect, let's also bind the certificate to a user session that is derived from a user fingerprint. That way the CA can track users across all sites

[–] stinky@redlemmy.com 11 points 2 days ago

I just want to serve https, not get someone's dick permanently installed in my ass

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›