4 ms·
I strongly disagree with this change. You should probably never accept client certificates signed by Let's Encrypt, but I think that it normalized something ver
by GauntletWizard 1y ago
I strongly disagree with this change. You should probably never accept client certificates signed by Let's Encrypt, but I think that it normalized something very healthy in the ecosystem: issuing one certificate that acted as both server and client certificate. I have spent surprisingly little time on making this work in the TLS ecosystems of my clients, automatically building per-service TLS certificates - allowing a robust internal infrastructure of whitelisting client services while being simple enough for devs to implement themselves.
What I really wanted to do, and have proof of concept'd with only slightly more time, is per pod certificates, identifying a service account. It looks like this is progressing in mainline - https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/issues/4317 https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/issues/4317 - albeit very slowly.
- ymyms 1y agoI am also bummed out by this change. I really like the idea of using a certificate as a single identity for a service. Things could connect to a service using normal TLS but the service could also authenticate itself to other services using mTLS. After this change I'd need a separate certificate for the service to use for mTLS.