3 ms·
Please allow self-signed certificates for ".internal" by default
by lodovic 3y ago
Please allow self-signed certificates for ".internal" by default
- yencabulator 3y agoIf all self-signed certs are allowed by default, then the crypto means nothing at all -- that's not good.
- rzzzt 3y agoCrypto is/could be still fine, it will still make it harder for others to see the contents of the conversation that is going on between the two machines. What you are losing is the modicum of confidence that a website is the real deal because another party (that browser and OS manufacturers trust) took the time to, at the very least, verify ownership of the domain.
- yencabulator 3y agoAutomatically trusting any cert raises the bar for attackers from passive snooping to MITM. On a home LAN/wifi, MITM is pretty much as likely as passive listening. At the very least you need TOFU (trust-on-first-use) for any kind of real attack prevention.
- lodovic 3y agoThe reality is that most people have unencrypted communication with their home appliances because the certificate isn't trusted.
- lodovic 3y agoSo rather no crypto at all?
- 8organicbits 3y agoThe problem is ownership and trust roots. If you don't uniquely own a domain name then you can't get a TLS cert for it from a public CA. Private CAS still work, but are challenging. I've been exploring private-use-only domain registration at https://www.getlocalcert.net/ https://www.getlocalcert.net/, which is compatible with LetsEncrypt.
- PeterisP 3y agoCurrently you can get encryption if you care to configure it, so some have crypto and some don't; but if all certs are trusted, then everybody gets compromised crypto, which isn't much better than no crypto, so it's IMHO a downgrade.
- denkmoon 3y agoNo, doing this properly isn’t hard.