4 ms·

Google, Mozilla, et al. should make a commitment to revoke the trust of any CA that is found to partake in behavior like that. Even retroactive revocation of ex

Google, Mozilla, et al. should make a commitment to revoke the trust of any CA that is found to partake in behavior like that. Even retroactive revocation of existing certificates shouldn't be off the table if the offense is egregious enough. It's actually pretty scary seeing just how many CAs are in the list of trusted CAs on any given device. While no government is beyond reproach, I do wish there were a way for me as a user to say "don't trust anything signed by CAs outside of these few countries, since it's most likely a hijack, phishing, or in the rare case that I did try to visit some random site, I can approve it manually."

throwawayway9 6y ago
You could, for example, use the Certificate Manager in Firefox to delete specific authorities you do not trust.
vbezhenar 6y ago
Browsers blacklisted Kazakhstan government certificate used for MITM which was not even trusted. It is absurd to expect anything less than blacklisting such a CA immediately. Certificate transparency is required for all certificates since April, 2018, so you can't really issue rogue certificate.
- razakel 6y ago
  Here's the Bugzilla report where they actually request their root be added to Firefox: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1232689 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1232689 The answer is basically "no".
  - vbezhenar 6y ago
    AFAIK they used different certificate for MITM. Currently they are using certificate mentioned in that bug to issue certificates for government websites (like https://elicense.kz/ https://elicense.kz/ ), so actually a lot of citizens who need to use government services have to install that certificate as a root anyway. I don't think that they would use that certificate for MITM. They're not fools and they understand that it would lead to blacklisting it which would halt a lot of operations in the country.
- StavrosK 6y ago
  Does the browser check?
- int_19h 6y ago
  > It is absurd to expect anything less than blacklisting such a CA immediately. Is it, though? Germany has a lot more economic leverage than Kazakhstan. Suppose they pass a law requiring any browser sold or otherwise offered on the German market to have the government certificate in the chain of trust... how many large companies would cave?

throwawayway9 6y ago

You could, for example, use the Certificate Manager in Firefox to delete specific authorities you do not trust.

vbezhenar 6y ago

Browsers blacklisted Kazakhstan government certificate used for MITM which was not even trusted. It is absurd to expect anything less than blacklisting such a CA immediately. Certificate transparency is required for all certificates since April, 2018, so you can't really issue rogue certificate.

razakel 6y ago
Here's the Bugzilla report where they actually request their root be added to Firefox: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1232689 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1232689 The answer is basically "no".
- vbezhenar 6y ago
  AFAIK they used different certificate for MITM. Currently they are using certificate mentioned in that bug to issue certificates for government websites (like https://elicense.kz/ https://elicense.kz/ ), so actually a lot of citizens who need to use government services have to install that certificate as a root anyway. I don't think that they would use that certificate for MITM. They're not fools and they understand that it would lead to blacklisting it which would halt a lot of operations in the country.
StavrosK 6y ago
Does the browser check?
int_19h 6y ago
> It is absurd to expect anything less than blacklisting such a CA immediately. Is it, though? Germany has a lot more economic leverage than Kazakhstan. Suppose they pass a law requiring any browser sold or otherwise offered on the German market to have the government certificate in the chain of trust... how many large companies would cave?