On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 12:45:46AM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote: > Peio Ziarsolo [2008-05-07 13:03 +0200]: > > But for power user that know the significance of a bad certificate it's > > annoniying add exceptions (this morning I have to add 3 esceptions). > > This doesn't have anything to do with power users/n00bs. An invalid > SSL certificate isn't any better or worse depending on the type of > user. If a site sets up SSL with an invalid certificate, then this > buys the user nothing but a false sense of security. > > The proper approach to this IMHO is to make adding exceptions in all > web browsers (especially IE) as hard and explicit as in Firefox 3. > This would perhaps force site admins to get a grip and stop ignoring > broken SSL certs, once they get a flood of complaints. > > > Is there any key to toogle off this new feature? > > I *so much* hope that there isn't. People should really start to > understand that this is a SERIOUS error and shouldn't at all be > considered 'normal'.
Invalid certs are one thing. But doesn't this also affect self-signed certs? Self-signed certs are appropriate for many use cases in which the goal is primarily encryption (e.g. to protect data flowing back from the server to the user), rather than e.g. protecting bank accounts by authenticating the server to the user. E.g. connecting to a local ebox management port, or a small community wiki. In many low-security situations, this change pushes server operators into buying pricey certs from certificate vendors who often offer little or no meaningful vetting and accept zero liability. This stuff is complicated, involves politics, and can't be painted with such a broad brush. Education is a big part of it, like with most security-related issues. The current warnings are confusing, and are being improved. Let's try to see to it that they communicate as well as possible. Otherwise too many grass-roots sites will just go back to asking folks to enter passwords over unencrypted connections, or users will get used to bypassing yet another set of dialogs and phishing will continue scarcely abated. E.g. how hard is it for folks to buy in to their own web of trust and get e.g. all CACert certs accepted? http://cacert.org Neal McBurnett http://mcburnett.org/neal/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
