Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port
Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org> Wed, 22 April 2015 04:09 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
X-Original-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 505EE1B3173 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 21:09:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KXHEGwtsMT4V for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 21:09:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mournblade.imrryr.org (mournblade.imrryr.org [38.117.134.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D67021B315B for <acme@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 21:09:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mournblade.imrryr.org (Postfix, from userid 1034) id 4DC81283033; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 04:09:47 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 04:09:47 +0000
From: Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
To: "acme@ietf.org" <acme@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20150422040947.GJ25758@mournblade.imrryr.org>
References: <352DA5FE-AC6F-49A7-8F9F-70A74889204F@apple.com> <CAK3OfOjey4bk02qC_jj2c0AzZ54qnP=KAJnG=mXnO6A5gZ4m9g@mail.gmail.com> <CAL02cgQ94ijVrCM9SStcodRW+XSG2w5Zwu3+ny8HriDBnxjdtg@mail.gmail.com> <FF21526F-BA8D-4F54-AAE3-047632706668@apple.com> <CAL02cgSDk0TNYusEkXA3onmqF7=kaAWhHjpW8WjbiqxgQMdQwQ@mail.gmail.com> <555F6C74-2416-4893-BDEA-A3C2E55A6D57@apple.com> <16985cf1c8c444c48d328fa766ec5ff8@usma1ex-dag1mb2.msg.corp.akamai.com> <DE264105-7317-4343-BCEE-539A73D42544@apple.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <DE264105-7317-4343-BCEE-539A73D42544@apple.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/0gH6ivEQEMTy4hTwKg6Mzy5suPg>
Subject: Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: acme@ietf.org
List-Id: Automated Certificate Management Environment <acme.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/acme/>
List-Post: <mailto:acme@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 04:09:51 -0000
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 07:53:25PM -0700, Bruce Gaya wrote: > The policy of Let's Encrypt Certificate Authority, however, is > very important! I also would very much like that CA to allow > client-defined callback ports below 1024. That level of diligence would finally expose the security of certificate issuance for the charade that it is. If the LE CA adopted this policy, I would expect its certificates to be worth exactly the price charged for them. Relying parties should not trust such a CA. Of course relying parties should also not trust certificates based on many of the other types of "it just works" issuance practices. For example, certificates issued on the basis of the ability to respond to an insecure email sent to an "admin" mailbox at the domain, etc. However much we pretend otherwise, the only party in position to make a low (near zero) cost assurance that a particular owner legitimately controls a given domain is the domain registrar. The domain owner can attempt to demonstrate such control by injecting "cookie" records into the DNS, but such demonstrations are subject to MiTM attacks on the DV certificate issuing CA. So in my view DV certificates are largely worthless (not significantly better than unauthenticated TLS, and are used only because HTTPS insists on an often meaningless CA signature). The fact that LE helps to bring the cost, including deployment costs, of meaningless certificates to $0 is I guess progress. -- Viktor.
- [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Bruce Gaya
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Jacob Hoffman-Andrews
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Bruce Gaya
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Nico Williams
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Salz, Rich
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Bruce Gaya
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Randy Bush
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Bruce Gaya
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Salz, Rich
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Bruce Gaya
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Salz, Rich
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Bruce Gaya
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Ted Hardie
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Martin Thomson
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Peter Eckersley
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Martin Thomson
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Salz, Rich
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Bruce Gaya
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [Acme] Want client-defined callback port Michael Ströder