Let's Encrypt bans certificate usage in any US sanctioned territory [pdf]

Post by joemi » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 7:42 PM UTC

john_strinlai wrote: post #139

jaas wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's Encrypt certificates continue to be available in both Iran and Russia, just not for the Iranian and Russian governments. The terms of service update to clarify what we have always done, comply with relevant law, has not changed the situation for either country.

you should update the documents to reflect this stance. " You are not a person or entity that is: (a) located in, organized under the laws of, or ordinarily resident in any country or territory that is the target of comprehensive U.S. sanctions; " this says nothing (edit: specific) about government (edit: only), and is applicable to normal people in those areas.

Post by xxpor » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 7:47 PM UTC

rzerowan wrote: post #114

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #101

Let's Encrypt’s mission is to create a more secure and privacy-respecting web, except for people residing in countries with the most need for a more secure and privacy-respecting web. Sure, that's great. That said, pretty sure this is stems from the insane US legal requirement to not export SSL technology to enemy countries. I'm sure some of y'all are old enough to remember when web browsers came in "international fr…

Seems in all thing tech at the moment the US legal system is accelearting a great split and erectinga digital iron curtain, from AI models to the more mundane like TLS certs. Its been standard for a while for many Linux distros based in the US to toe the party line - like RedHat having notices pretty similar to this one by LE. Seems any meaningful Open Projects will have to choose what path they want to take, be like…

Post by joemi » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 7:47 PM UTC

Post by lesostep » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 7:48 PM UTC

MarleTangible wrote: post #37

axiologist wrote: post #35

This somehow confirms my gut feeling that digital certificates are mainly a means to enforce exclusion on behalf of the certificate authority ownership. It is a tool to prevent people from taking full ownership and control of whatever is affected by digital certificates, be it software, firmware, hardware, or as in this case SSL/TLS. That's digital tyranny in disguise.

I always saw it as a trust-chain and think that anyone is welcomed to create a root certificate and distribute it to whomever trusts them. Most simple services may not need TLS, but with the ISPs eavesdropping on our communication, a form of secure communication is required and the currently best solution we have requires a trust-chain to be built.

Post by cromka » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 7:53 PM UTC

rafram wrote: post #136

cassianoleal wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not about countries sanctioning each other. This is the US sanctioning a local company because a foreign company doesn’t follow certain US laws in foreign soil, where such laws don’t apply. It’s a bit like the US arresting your mom at home in Texas because you ate a baggie of magic truffles in Amsterdam.

You're being very vague. Please explain what you mean? I don't see anything here about the US "sanctioning a local company," and I'm not aware of that being possible under US law.