4 ms·
Is this total BS then?: "Why pay for something that’s free, you ask? When a user visits a website that is secured with a self-signed, or free SSL certificate,
by josephjrobison 9y ago
Is this total BS then?:
"Why pay for something that’s free, you ask? When a user visits a website that is secured with a self-signed, or free SSL certificate, most web browsers will post an error message. While some people will click “I understand the risks” and proceed to your site, it’s likely that many people will click the “Get me out of here!” button and never return.
The real problem lies in the fact that self-signed certificates are virtually unregulated. If your site is compromised, it may still appear secure; however, certificates issued by a trusted certificate authority can be revoked and therefore alert users of any potential threats."
Source: http://searchengineland.com/comprehensive-guide-ssl-certificates-264377 http://searchengineland.com/comprehensive-guide-ssl-certific...
- MertsA 9y agoSort of, that's conflating all free SSL certs with self signed certs. The whole point of an SSL cert is to provide authentication that the server you're talking to is really the server you were trying to reach at www.example.com . They are talking about self signed certificates which is basically the remote server saying "I'm www.example.com, you can trust me because I said so". Let's Encrypt is the same as other CAs out there in terms of authentication. In fact, if you see a certificate that's signed by Symantec, it's more likely to be mississued than a certificate signed by Let's Encrypt.
- Ajedi32 9y agoThe certificates Let's Encrypt issues are _not_ self-signed. They are signed by a trusted certificate authority which Let's Encrypt manages, and are no different from domain validated certs signed by any other CA. That article makes the mistake of assuming that if a certificate is free then it _must_ be self-signed, which is obviously false.