3 ms·
How are client certificates, a mandatory feature of TLS and specifically what I mentioned, and what you are replying to, unrelated to this discussion ?
by rkeene2 9y ago
How are client certificates, a mandatory feature of TLS and specifically what I mentioned, and what you are replying to, unrelated to this discussion ?
- jessaustin 9y agoWhat is this "mandatory feature" stuff? We're talking [0] about employees on websites "protected" by TLS, and expecting privacy while doing so. If they order hemorrhoid cream on Amazon, their browser talks to the shitbox, the shitbox talks to Amazon, and client certs have nothing to do with that. The browser verifies that it trusts the shitbox, and nobody else verifies anything. One supposes there might be some banks or B2B sites that might use client certs, but they're such a minority that no one ever heard of them. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16186735 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16186735
- rkeene2 9y agoClient certificates are a mandatory feature of TLS that any TLS server could request and the proxy would be unable to handle the request, as it (and ideally the client) has no access to the private key. Therefore, these types of proxies break TLS by being unable to support mandatory features. Separate from that, client certificates are certainly common, being used for authentication, in the US Federal Government, which issues tens of millions of certificates for this purpose as well as smartcards, since George W. Bush banned passwords with HSPD-12.
- jessaustin 9y agoThe shitboxes definitely "break" TLS. That's why firms buy them in the first place. A firm that was using smartcards with the characteristics you describe would presumably figure out something other way to pretend to prevent data exfil.