4 ms·
So...basically you want SSL client certificates but with a slightly less sucky UI? I mean, https already supports this, it's just that setting up servers to de
by merijnv 11y ago
So...basically you want SSL client certificates but with a slightly less sucky UI?
I mean, https already supports this, it's just that setting up servers to deal with client certs sucks and the UI for users is also pretty bad. But the infrastructure is already there without poorly reinventing the wheel over SSH.
- struppi 11y agoRight, that's exactly what I want. Or something like BrowserID / Persona was supposed to be. It has to be slick and frictionless, otherwise it won't stand a chance. You know, there is a reason nobody uses client certificates...
- scrollaway 11y agoAye in the end I don't think the protocol itself matters as much as the concept of doing (asymmetric) auth in the browser rather than layered over http. Yelling "but it already exists! client certs!" is kinda unproductive, like you said there's a reason nobody uses them.
- ZeroMinx 11y agoI appreciate I'm a bit late to the party here, but.. Does anyone have any type of explanation of why the UI in browsers for client certs are so user-unfriendly? I would really like to use client certs more, but with things the way they are that's impossible right now. It's just too hard for a normal person to use them.