4 ms·

Why does Google adsense have an invalid https certificate? (looks SCARY in Firefox 3)

2 points by petervandijck 18y ago

coglethorpe 18y ago
Try it with www.google.com instead of just google.com.
- spydez 18y ago
  Exactly. For some reason, Google has SSL certs for www.google.com, and tries to use that cert for google.com connections too.
  - jamess 18y ago
    They used to have a far more expansive certificate, with a subject alt. name good for *.google.com, and I think google.com as well, so they could use it on subdomains like adsense.google.com. It was a really handy server for testing TLS implementations with big complex certificates. It was also sort of illegal, having both a common name and subject alt. names. However, the certificate expired and they got a new one early this year, and now it's some bog standard thwate issued cert, good only for one year (Hello! You have billions, you can afford to get a certificate issued for more than a year at a time guys!) Anyway, you should really only be warned in the event of domain name mismatch. This isn't a fatal error. I guess firefox has gone overboard on the treating users like idiots front.
notauser 18y ago
The new unsigned SSL warnings are a massive overreaction - so much so that I think Mozilla must have a deal with some certificate root companies to match their Google deal. For a great deal of what goes on over the internet unsigned SSL is just fine. You don't care who you are dealing with, you just care that no one else can listen in (and sometimes that it is the same guy as last time). You only need authentication for banking, shopping and a few other corner cases.
- jamess 18y ago
  The problem with "not caring who you're dealing with", is that it raises the possibility that who you're actually dealing with is a man in the middle, who is snooping on your traffic. If you get warned that a certificate is self-signed or signed by an untrusted authority, then you either have to check the key fingerprint or take a chance. Not that I'm happy with firefox taking this choice away from you, mind.
thwarted 18y ago
These resized-by-the-browser images are getting really annoying, I've noticed an uptick in it the six months or so. That image is completely unreadable with the explicit height and width in the layout, and it's not overly big that including it all without resizing would matter. Additionally, you have to click /again/ to see the actual content.

2 points by petervandijck 18y ago

coglethorpe 18y ago

Try it with www.google.com instead of just google.com.

spydez 18y ago
Exactly. For some reason, Google has SSL certs for www.google.com, and tries to use that cert for google.com connections too.
- jamess 18y ago
  They used to have a far more expansive certificate, with a subject alt. name good for *.google.com, and I think google.com as well, so they could use it on subdomains like adsense.google.com. It was a really handy server for testing TLS implementations with big complex certificates. It was also sort of illegal, having both a common name and subject alt. names. However, the certificate expired and they got a new one early this year, and now it's some bog standard thwate issued cert, good only for one year (Hello! You have billions, you can afford to get a certificate issued for more than a year at a time guys!) Anyway, you should really only be warned in the event of domain name mismatch. This isn't a fatal error. I guess firefox has gone overboard on the treating users like idiots front.

notauser 18y ago

The new unsigned SSL warnings are a massive overreaction - so much so that I think Mozilla must have a deal with some certificate root companies to match their Google deal. For a great deal of what goes on over the internet unsigned SSL is just fine. You don't care who you are dealing with, you just care that no one else can listen in (and sometimes that it is the same guy as last time). You only need authentication for banking, shopping and a few other corner cases.

jamess 18y ago
The problem with "not caring who you're dealing with", is that it raises the possibility that who you're actually dealing with is a man in the middle, who is snooping on your traffic. If you get warned that a certificate is self-signed or signed by an untrusted authority, then you either have to check the key fingerprint or take a chance. Not that I'm happy with firefox taking this choice away from you, mind.

thwarted 18y ago

These resized-by-the-browser images are getting really annoying, I've noticed an uptick in it the six months or so. That image is completely unreadable with the explicit height and width in the layout, and it's not overly big that including it all without resizing would matter. Additionally, you have to click /again/ to see the actual content.