3 ms·
> I can't tell whether you're talking about how you think things should work or making claims about how they actually do work. How can you not tell? I was extr
by mehrdadn 9y ago
> I can't tell whether you're talking about how you think things should work or making claims about how they actually do work.
How can you not tell? I was extremely explicit that this was the former in the very first sentence of my initial comment:
>>>>>> Taking a step back here... ___shouldn't___ proving ownership of a domain involve the domain registrar some way, rather than involving whoever happens to host your DNS?
- tptacek 9y agoThe only reason we have DV certs is because people find normal certs painful to apply for. They're a convenience. Similarly: LetsEncrypt does HTTP challenges, relying on the DNS as a side effect, because lots of people who need certificates do not control their DNS records, even if they "own" the domain.
- mehrdadn 9y ago> The only reason we have DV certs is because people find normal certs painful to apply for. They're a convenience. Similarly: LetsEncrypt does HTTP challenges, relying on the DNS as a side effect, because lots of people who need certificates do not control their DNS records, even if they "own" the domain. You don't seem to be reading a single sentence of what I write at all? My method literally caters to those people who do not control their DNS records because it very explicitly avoids using DNS to verify "ownership". I'm getting tired of this.