Discussion:
Let's Encrypt
ianG
2016-06-25 12:14:06 UTC
Permalink
http://www.commitstrip.com/en/2016/06/13/the-end-of-an-expensive-era/?
Lucas Werkmeister
2016-06-25 12:32:52 UTC
Permalink
Could you please stop spamming this mailing list with random links? We
have better things to do than guessing at what you mean to tell us with
these emails. If you want to say something, or start a discussion about
a topic, this is not the way to do it.
Post by ianG
http://www.commitstrip.com/en/2016/06/13/the-end-of-an-expensive-era/?
Wytze van der Raay
2016-06-25 13:48:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lucas Werkmeister
Could you please stop spamming this mailing list with random links? We
have better things to do than guessing at what you mean to tell us with
these emails. If you want to say something, or start a discussion about
a topic, this is not the way to do it.
I object to this request. The link that IanG sent is not random at all,
but highly on-topic for this list in my opinion. I am pretty sure that
I am not the only one with CAcert who enjoyed this post.

Regards,
-- wytze
Post by Lucas Werkmeister
Post by ianG
http://www.commitstrip.com/en/2016/06/13/the-end-of-an-expensive-era/?
Lucas Werkmeister
2016-06-25 14:02:49 UTC
Permalink
On-topic in what way? Ian hasn’t bothered to explain this at all, which
is what I object to. Does he mean to imply that Let’s Encrypt has made
not only Symantec, but also CAcert obsolete (“I don’t need it anymore”)?
Or that we should point and laugh at Symantec for having their business
model destroyed? Or perhaps that we should sponsor CommitStrip?

If I want funny snippets without context, I turn to Twitter (where, as
it happens, Ian has also posted this comic). But from this list I expect
more than that.
Post by Wytze van der Raay
Post by Lucas Werkmeister
Could you please stop spamming this mailing list with random links? We
have better things to do than guessing at what you mean to tell us with
these emails. If you want to say something, or start a discussion about
a topic, this is not the way to do it.
I object to this request. The link that IanG sent is not random at all,
but highly on-topic for this list in my opinion. I am pretty sure that
I am not the only one with CAcert who enjoyed this post.
Regards,
-- wytze
Post by Lucas Werkmeister
Post by ianG
http://www.commitstrip.com/en/2016/06/13/the-end-of-an-expensive-era/?
Jörg Kastning
2016-06-25 14:10:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lucas Werkmeister
If I want funny snippets without context, I turn to Twitter (where, as
On-topic in what way? Ian hasn’t bothered to explain this at all, which
is what I object to. Does he mean to imply that Let’s Encrypt has made
not only Symantec, but also CAcert obsolete (“I don’t need it anymore”)?
Or that we should point and laugh at Symantec for having their business
model destroyed? Or perhaps that we should sponsor CommitStrip?
If I want funny snippets without context, I turn to Twitter (where, as
it happens, Ian has also posted this comic). But from this list I expect
more than that.
I go with Locas on this. If I want to see funny pictures and comics a
look around on facebook and twitter. But I don't wanna see stuff like
that on a mailing list, too.

Kind regards,
Joerg
Wytze van der Raay
2016-06-25 14:13:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lucas Werkmeister
On-topic in what way? Ian hasn’t bothered to explain this at all, which
is what I object to. Does he mean to imply that Let’s Encrypt has made
not only Symantec, but also CAcert obsolete (“I don’t need it anymore”)?
Or that we should point and laugh at Symantec for having their business
model destroyed? Or perhaps that we should sponsor CommitStrip?
Well, if you want to know what he means, you could ask him.
I consider it as both a good comic and a sign to remind all of us to
think about the meaning of CAcert and its differences with other
sources of digital certificates, paid or free.
Post by Lucas Werkmeister
If I want funny snippets without context, I turn to Twitter (where, as
it happens, Ian has also posted this comic). But from this list I expect
more than that.
You can use it as a starting point for a discussion (and I don't mean
a discussion on the appropriateness of such postings on this list).

Regards,
-- wytze
Mikael Nordfeldth
2016-06-25 14:55:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wytze van der Raay
You can use it as a starting point for a discussion (and I don't mean
a discussion on the appropriateness of such postings on this list).
Personally I tend to use mailinglist as a method of collecting
information and discussion where thought and time is put into each post.
Regardless of whether the linked image was on topic or not it was _only_
linked to an external host. It was neither attached, explained nor
commented upon. Such bad practice for posting to many subscribing users
should be commented or acted upon either way.

Or in other words: it is my expectation, as a mostly passive reader,
that posts to a mailing list ought to contain more substance than just
an HTTP URL.

Especially if it's supposed to be used as a starting point (i.e. as the
intent of the original poster) it should be put into a context.
Otherwise one has no idea what to make of it. I'm not even sure a reply
was ever even desired from the original poster in this case, which would
be odd for a public mailing list.
--
Mikael Nordfeldth
https://blog.mmn-o.se/
XMPP/mail: ***@hethane.se
OpenPGP Fingerprint: AE68 9813 0B7C FCE3 B2FA 727B C7CE 635B B52E 9B31
Arcor Aktuell
2016-06-25 20:57:44 UTC
Permalink
Well that link has a good point.

Why should a user invest time in a broken community that doesn't manage to get one of their main objectives done and rather fight internal wars.... If you can get a certificate for free?

Even tho the comic was targeted towards norton.
Post by Wytze van der Raay
You can use it as a starting point for a discussion (and I don't mean
a discussion on the appropriateness of such postings on this list).
Personally I tend to use mailinglist as a method of collecting information and discussion where thought and time is put into each post. Regardless of whether the linked image was on topic or not it was _only_ linked to an external host. It was neither attached, explained nor commented upon. Such bad practice for posting to many subscribing users should be commented or acted upon either way.
Or in other words: it is my expectation, as a mostly passive reader, that posts to a mailing list ought to contain more substance than just an HTTP URL.
Especially if it's supposed to be used as a starting point (i.e. as the intent of the original poster) it should be put into a context. Otherwise one has no idea what to make of it. I'm not even sure a reply was ever even desired from the original poster in this case, which would be odd for a public mailing list.
--
Mikael Nordfeldth
https://blog.mmn-o.se/
OpenPGP Fingerprint: AE68 9813 0B7C FCE3 B2FA 727B C7CE 635B B52E 9B31
Thorsten Bremer
2016-06-26 00:44:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wytze van der Raay
I consider it as both a good comic and a sign to remind all of us to
think about the meaning of CAcert and its differences with other
sources of digital certificates, paid or free.
Yes, that was my first thought after reading the comic, too. But after
reading the follow-ups to IanG's posting, I'm not sure about any meaning
of CAcert in the future.

Why? Let me point on two things:

I'm a "normal" CAcert-member, being an assurer, reading the blog and
this list etc. But I did not feel to be good informed about what
happened in CAcert... The blog is very low traffic and on this list I
could read a lot of personal fights. A lot of these mails are taken out
of context and cannot be understood from normal members which cannot
read the internal groups. We had complaints against IanG on this list
and after that there was a new board elected, at an SGM IanG was elected
as chair and an "underground"-group was founded to move CAcert from
Australia to Europe...

Wait, what...???

Everything in CAcert is very confusing since many years and I'm missing
a kind of (periodic) newsletter to all members. Please explain in simple
words what is happening in CAcert right now.

The clearest words in the last months came from Eva who asked for
getting people for the support-team.


Second, I sense that the amount of people who "live" for CAcert is
dramatically decreasing:

I'm an assurer since 2007, but mainly active at conferences. 2009 at the
Ubucon and the CCC-Congress I assured with a lot of enthusiastic and
experienced assurers, who teached me a lot about assuring and "reading"
foreign passports.

2011 for the CCC-Camp I asked on the mailinglist about something to
promote CAcert. I could get the big banner for doing a CAcert-"booth" at
the camp. I could quickly found some other assurers via Twitter and the
Camp-Wiki. We promoted some assuring-events, assured a lot of new people
and had a lot of fun.
At that time, suddenly *I* was the experienced assurer there and could
pass everything I learned at the events before to the others.
I think, this working together is the way how CAcert should work.

But: We were asked many many MANY times for the Browser-integration of
CAcert and could not answer this. And everybody who asked this on the
mailinglist, got only stupid answers in the past...

Well, in 2015, I tried to get the banner again for the CCC-Camp. Asking
on the german mailinglist I only got one snotty answer. Later on the
camp I was the only person wearing a CAcert-T-Shirt. I was very
demotivated on CAcert after the camp. Where are the people from 2011,
where was the help getting the banner, where was the spirit of CAcert?

But the 2015-camp was not a complete CAcert-desaster for me: Eva and
Bernhard noticed my T-Shirt and they try to convince me, that CAcert is
not dead. Thanks for all the talking about CAcert to both of you.

And for last on this topic, a personal statistic: In 2011 after the
camp, I reached a total of 150+ assurances. This small amount of
assurances pushed me in the Top-100 of the assurer-list. After that, I
visited only the 2015-camp and so I did only make one new assurance in
the past 5 years... But: I'm still on the SAME position on the
Top-Assurers-list... How can this happen? Are there NO people in the
community who are doing assurances any more?


Well, CAcert is a CA which is not integrated in the browsers and where
people who are asking about this were hooted down. In CAcert, the people
fight against each other on this list and from the point of a normal
member, no positive activity to advance CAcert can be mentioned.

On the other hand we have StartSSL for many years and now Let's Encrypt.
Both offering SSL-certificates without pain and with
browser-intergration. Who needs CAcert any more? When you discover that
you are riding a dead horse...


But I still have the meaning, that CAcert is a lot of better than other
CAs. After reading my negative thoughts, this will be a suprise for you.
Why? Because Let's Encrypt and all the commercial CAs will make only a
domain-based-verification. This might be OK, but CAcert will make a
personal validation. When I see a CAcert-certificate and take a look
into it, I could be sure, that this certificate belongs to THIS person.
Not a domain, a person. But as long as CAcert is not integrated, this is
only theoretically. Yes, I can install CAcert on EVERY of my devices and
can teach my neighbourhood to do so. But at least at work I have
probably an environment where I don't have he right to do this...


But on the other hand: The Certificate-system is collective dead. There
are a lot of news talking about CAs which where compromised by hackers
or generated false certificates as a fault. Why should I trust anything
of them?

The solution of this could be to return the control of certificates to
the users, so that nobody needs CAs anymore. They should gerenate the
certificates for their services on ther own and publish them via DANE.
Yes, DANE is not very common. But today there are services like Postfix
that will use the certificates from DANE/DNS for transport-encryption.
Nasty spoken, the acceptance of DANE is much higher than the acceptance
of CAcert...

Nobody needs another CA. But doing propaganda for DANE etc. could be a
good project for CAcert.

Well, good Night,

Thorsten
Jörg Kastning
2016-06-26 09:55:08 UTC
Permalink
Dear all,

as a mostly passive reader of this list I like to spend my to pennies on
the current discussion.

As many of you I was asked many times: "Why should I use certificates
from CAcert, when I could get any from StartSSL or Let's Encrypt for
free as well?"

Well, my answer depends on who was asking and for what purpose he or she
is going to use TLS/SSL.

For me, I like to use CAcert because it is easy and convenient to get
certificates for my systems and services which are being used by me, my
friends and family and some other buddies who are familiar with security
topics. To have the interfaces provided by CAcert.org to manage my
certificates is an advantage for me instead of using self-signed
certificates on my own.

In this case it doesn't matter that the CAcert certificates aren't
integrated in browsers and OS. I tell the mentioned user group to
inspect the certificate and what they should expect to find in it. And
most people of this group install the CAcert-Root by themselves. But
this group of users is a little tiny one.

On the other hand, when I like to provide a service for a large group of
potential users on the web CAcert is not the CA of choice. It's because
most people on the web have now idea how internet pki or the web of
trust works. They don't no how to estimate if a certificate is reliable
or not. They put faith in their browser to make this decision for them.
And let's face it, most users don't wanna know anything about the
details of certificates, encryption and integrity. The just want to use
services offered to them.

So, in this case I recommend using certificates from a CA like StartSSL
or Let's Encrypt instead of CAcert.

IMHO CAcert could be integrated in the trust anchors of browsers and OS
right away because it is not more trustworthy nor less then most of the
other CAs supplied within the browsers and trust stores of an os.

Google et al. have faced that the trust model of internet pki is
severely damaged and have started to provide know mechanisms like the
[Public Key Pinning Extension for
HTTP](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7469) to help you pin your
certificate and make it more difficult for Trudy to run a service with a
fraud certificate in the middle.

I've faced many scenarios where wildcard certificates were used on proxy
servers and routers to decrypt ssl traffic and a user has no chance to
notice that unless he or she knows exactly what information should be
provided in detail by the certificate. Key Pinning is an effective
method to make these Man-In-The-Middle-Attacks from companies and
countries visible. In this way it helps to make TLS/SSL-Communication
more secure.

That are my to cents.

Regards,
Joerg
Thorsten Bremer
2016-06-27 08:21:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jörg Kastning
I've faced many scenarios where wildcard certificates were used on proxy
servers and routers to decrypt ssl traffic and a user has no chance to
notice that unless he or she knows exactly what information should be
provided in detail by the certificate. Key Pinning is an effective
method to make these Man-In-The-Middle-Attacks from companies and
countries visible. In this way it helps to make TLS/SSL-Communication
more secure.
A technical question on that:

Is every ssl-proxy working that way by using a wildcard-certificate and
terminating the incoming ssl-session?

So if I can see MY certificate behind a ssl-proxy (serial-no.,
fingerprint, CA etc. are correctly displayed), can I be in that case
SURE that the ssl-proxy didn't manipulationg the ssl-session?

Thanks,
Thorsten
Pete Stephenson
2016-06-27 08:38:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thorsten Bremer
Post by Jörg Kastning
I've faced many scenarios where wildcard certificates were used on proxy
servers and routers to decrypt ssl traffic and a user has no chance to
notice that unless he or she knows exactly what information should be
provided in detail by the certificate. Key Pinning is an effective
method to make these Man-In-The-Middle-Attacks from companies and
countries visible. In this way it helps to make TLS/SSL-Communication
more secure.
Is every ssl-proxy working that way by using a wildcard-certificate and
terminating the incoming ssl-session?

Most that I've seen have the administrator use an internally-trusted CA,
such as one generated for a company's internal use. Either the internal CA
cert itself or an intermediate cert is provided to the SSL proxy, which
then generates "valid" certs on-demand for any secure site it encounters.

Not all work that way, if course, and you may find some that use wildcards.
Post by Thorsten Bremer
So if I can see MY certificate behind a ssl-proxy (serial-no.,
fingerprint, CA etc. are correctly displayed), can I be in that case SURE
that the ssl-proxy didn't manipulationg the ssl-session?

The serial can be copied by an SSL proxy, as can the CN, O, OU, dates, etc.
The fingerprint and CA will be different from the authentic certificate,
though.

Cheers!
-Pete
Post by Thorsten Bremer
Thanks,
Thorsten
Nico Baggus
2016-06-25 14:05:33 UTC
Permalink
I can appreciate some lightheartedness... ;-)
Post by Lucas Werkmeister
Could you please stop spamming this mailing list with random links? We
have better things to do than guessing at what you mean to tell us with
these emails. If you want to say something, or start a discussion about
a topic, this is not the way to do it.
Post by ianG
http://www.commitstrip.com/en/2016/06/13/the-end-of-an-expensive-era/?
HerHde
2016-06-28 15:20:54 UTC
Permalink
Hello folks,
have a look at my attachment and describe, what you see./

I was just an user of CAcert, using the Certs for both my personal and
organisational Web/Mail/XMPP servers, which turned out to be some kind
of mistake, as inexperienced users tend to interpret the missing
integration in browsers, E-Mail-clients and other software as some
"Linux things don't work"-Phenomena, especially when introducing them to
free software. That's not good, hackers, that's not goooood.

Let's encrypt (that was the topic, right?) solves this problem, it is a
technically better solution for SSL/TLS encryption.
But there is no identity assurance except the DNS-Stuff.
CAcert certs don't contain personal information, so the visitor has no
benefit. But CAcert signs my PGP-Keys, that's cool, but only for a few.
IMHO CAcert is now about trust and authentication.

But there is also this typical group/organisation/technocracy-drama. Oh
guys, please. Stop that, all of you! (Yes there were some really good
posts, though.)

TL;DR: I have no solutions, but YOU should focus on the topic, not the
about-off-topic and epic drama regarding the junta. Otherwise the common
lack of interest will bury your problems.

Greetings
~HerHde
Kurt Albershardt
2016-06-29 04:51:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by HerHde
Let's encrypt (that was the topic, right?) solves this problem, it is a
technically better solution for SSL/TLS encryption.
But there is no identity assurance except the DNS-Stuff.
CAcert certs don't contain personal information, so the visitor has no
benefit. But CAcert signs my PGP-Keys, that's cool, but only for a few.
IMHO CAcert is now about trust and authentication.
You may be onto something there. Forget for a moment about past labels
and functions. What is the real value of this community? The assurance
system alone is something clearly worth keeping. What should we do with it?
Eelco Hotting
2016-06-29 05:00:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by HerHde
Let's encrypt (that was the topic, right?) solves this problem, it is a
technically better solution for SSL/TLS encryption.
But there is no identity assurance except the DNS-Stuff.
CAcert certs don't contain personal information, so the visitor has no
benefit. But CAcert signs my PGP-Keys, that's cool, but only for a few.
IMHO CAcert is now about trust and authentication.
You may be onto something there. Forget for a moment about past labels and functions. What is the real value of this community? The assurance system alone is something clearly worth keeping. What should we do with it?
Offer the WoT as a means to provide meaningful EV Certs on top of the Let's Encrypt SSL certs. Can be integrated with the automated system. But if I were them, I wouldn't risk working with the current CACert drama champions. :)

Eelco

Loading...