TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

TLS Certificate Transparency logs don't always talk to you

9 pointsby rdpintqogeogsaaalmost 3 years ago

3 comments

olliejalmost 3 years ago
The CT Logs were a solution to the problem of miss-issuance being essentially undetectable, and shorter certificate lifetimes were the solution to the frustrating fail-open behavior of the revocation mechanism[s]. The other advantage is that OCSP was a privacy nightmare, as it required broadcasting every site you visited just on the off chance a cert was revoked. Unsurprisingly there&#x27;s quite an incentive to monetize those queries.<p>The specific problem in this post is that the log servers are occasionally down, which is obviously suboptimal, but was also a predicted and understood problem, which is why every client is expected to require that any certificate that they validate is signed by multiple (I think &gt;= 3? but that was also years ago) unrelated log services.<p>Client validation is essentially are these log tokens valid - revocation checking a la OCSP is still essentially useless in practice, and I think some vendors monitor for revocations and construct their own revocation lists for all their CAs that their clients pull. The notable thing point being that their clients aren&#x27;t pulling per domain, they&#x27;re getting the full list of all revocations. I assume actual implementations do some kind of partial&#x2F;delta updates (you could imagine &quot;entire DB&quot; and &quot;last N hours&quot; or something)
throwaway787544almost 3 years ago
Logs are there because any person at any CA can generate a cert for your domain and we want to know when that happens. We should fix that.<p>A new standard could dictate that registrars and CAs have to work together. Specifically, customer uploads a public key to a registrar, and a CA has to use registrar&#x27;s public key to validate a CSR. This makes it impossible to create a valid certificate without the domain owner&#x27;s key - and not whoever took over the domain record for the moment that the CA validated. The browser should validate that the cert was signed using the key from the registrar.<p>In this way even a rogue CA cert can&#x27;t work on a client. Only a cert created by the domain owner will be valid. So only one CA and one key can create a valid cert.
评论 #31678997 未加载
rektidealmost 3 years ago
With specs like WebBundle, sites could self-sign the log content, in a way where other people could securely mirror&#x2F;cache another sites log resources in a way that&#x27;s still clear &amp; secure.