News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Defending Our Brand. Parent comment

Re:Defending Our Brand by zymhan on Thursday June 23, 2016 @01:59PM (#11963078)
While a worthy cause, Firefox would be utterly broken if Comodo was no longer a trusted CA.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending Our Brand by happyslobro on Thursday June 23, 2016 @05:02PM (#11964283)
Sounds like we need a new type of TLS warning:

> While this site's certificate is technically valid, it was issued by an untrustworthy (citation) agency (link to Comodo).

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending Our Brand by type0 on Thursday June 23, 2016 @05:44PM (#11964518)
Awesome idea, couple years ago I dropped the few certs I had with Comodo after all their malpractices.

This should be included as a warning for every website that has their cert: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comodo_Group#Controversies

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending Our Brand by i336_ on Friday June 24, 2016 @01:27AM (#11966817)
Followup idea: a trusted neutral 3rd party that ranks CAs by various factors, such as controversiality. Quotes Wikipedia and other (arguably) objective sources [of fact] and welcomes debate about potential bias.

Perhaps this group could publish reports periodically so that they can then be picked up and bundled into browsers - that way you're not constantly sending [trackable] cert requests to a 3rd party, and you already have the cert info so there's no query server to DDoS.

Maybe Firefox could incorporate it into the TLS info popup and possibly the HTTPS icon... Chrome never would; this idea goes way too close to the advertising industry.

An extension would be nice, but something like this would never go viral so would never get adoption. Native browser integration would be a must.

Also, mozilla.org's cert is by DigiCert. What's their track record?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending Our Brand by giancarlostoro on Thursday June 23, 2016 @03:39PM (#11963787)
Just how many use Comodo, and why isn't there some sort of movement pushing against Comodo? Hopefully if they lose business or start to they will think twice and attempt to restructure everything.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending Our Brand by pfg on Thursday June 23, 2016 @03:51PM (#11963851)
CloudFlare uses them for Universal SSL, so that's roughly 5% of all websites[1]. Their overall market share (in the CA business) appears to be around 40%[2].

[1]: https://w3techs.com/technologies/details/cn-cloudflare/all/a...

[2]: https://w3techs.com/technologies/overview/ssl_certificate/al...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending Our Brand by giancarlostoro on Thursday June 23, 2016 @03:53PM (#11963861)
Oh, CloudFlare uses them. That's quite a market share. It is sad that they have such a bad reputation... Hopefully someone buys them out who restructures them or something....
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending Our Brand by porpoisemonkey on Thursday June 23, 2016 @05:13PM (#11964351)
An alternative option is to petition CloudFlare to switch Certificate Authorities and hit Comodo where it hurts - in their wallet.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending Our Brand by wigam on Thursday June 23, 2016 @03:52PM (#11963855)
Hacker news uses Comodo as their CA.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending Our Brand by nojvek on Thursday June 23, 2016 @09:22PM (#11965598)
At least hn should switch to letsencrypt after the douchebaggery from comodo.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Defending Our Brand by giancarlostoro on Thursday June 23, 2016 @03:54PM (#11963864)
I didn't even notice. I guess they're a bigger fish than I ever realized.
[ Parent | on HN ]