4 ms·
> So exposing your internal infrastructure to the whole world and risking a 3rd party (CA) turning the keys (literally) to your kingdom to someone else is bette
by nsgi 6y ago
> So exposing your internal infrastructure to the whole world and risking a 3rd party (CA) turning the keys (literally) to your kingdom to someone else is better than someone making a mistake that’s very easy to discover and correct?
That's not how certificates work. The CA doesn't have your private key. They could theoretically sign a fake certificate with your hostname but that risk is still present if you use a private CA and is mitigated by certificate transparency
- dilyevsky 6y agoYes, should’ve been more clear on that they sign a cert without your knowledge and hand to to someone performing mitm. How is that risk present when you roll your own PKI and validate against your private CA (or intermediate) only? Regarding CT I’m not aware of any clients other than browsers actually enforcing that.
- closeparen 6y agoTypically an internal CA adds to the certificate trust store rather than replacing it.
- dilyevsky 6y agoYes you are correct here (although I’ve seen both methods). At least 3rd party won’t easily know which hostnames to fake though