Live data from Hacker News

StartEncrypt considered harmful today

computest.nl

41–42 of 42 posts

Re: StartEncrypt considered harmful today

#41
post #36
post #6

I can't believe that they not only decided not to implement ACME (the protocol behind Let's Encrypt), but also not to at least reuse large portions of ACME, like the way HTTP ownership validation was implemented. It's simply mind-boggling how they would discard a protocol that has received a lot of attention from various security experts. What's more, this design could not have been reviewed by anyone familiar with h…

FWIW I got in contact with their R&D team earlier last week and they told me: no StartEncrypt API now, later it will support IETF ACME, maybe open source.

Neat. Maybe they can even put license compliance on their roadmap (they statically linked in OpenSSL).

Re: StartEncrypt considered harmful today

#42
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, how do you define "untrustworthy"? Usually you delegate that decision to your browser vendor or OS distribution. If you no longer trust them for a specific CA, why trust them for any of the others? Browsers may rely on the certificate store and trust settings provided by your OS. For example, Firefox always uses their own certificate store, while Chrome relies on the system. certsimple has this guide on…

Does anyone know how browsers go about deciding which CAs to trust? It seems like browsers should be auditing CAs if they are going to be making this decision on our behalf. An audit should have caught this design flaw.

The requirements and procedures are discussed in the CA Browser Forum: https://cabforum.org/
Post reply on HN