Unless you need *.domain.tld certificates.
Domains are not free. Servers are not free. Bandwidth is not free. Time spent confirming a domain's ownership is not free. Would you rather get free certificates from a CA whose website is littered with gaudy ads?
Because that's what we were talking about: free certificates from StartSSL (or $8 from Comodo) which did everything that $800 certificates do.
I just meant to refute it.
You can get a free Lamborghini for an inexpensive $400,000 one-time fee!
Edit: also, if I can get an unlimited number of Lamborghinis for just 400k, where do I sign up??
Thanks for the info but I just tried to refute the fact that free/$8 certificates do the same as $800, which they clearly don't.
Don't get me wrong: it's great! But completely irrelevant for the argument.
> if I can get an unlimited number of Lamborghinis for just 400k, where do I sign up??
You only get a single certificate for $60, not an unlimited number of them.
EDIT: see child comment, I'm wrong and you do get unlimited certificates.
See https://www.startssl.com/?app=25#27
"The fees for Class 2 (60$) and higher are applied to the verification and not for the certificate(s), i.e. you pay for the validations we perform. Once validated there is no limit placed on the amount of certificates one can receive (This depends on other limitations such as uniqueness of the subject line for example)."
Edit: They cover exactly their costs. The cost is at validating your persona (they call you, you fax them scans of your passport/drivers license/etc, they need to check that etc.). Issuing a certificate is fully automatic so there are no costs associated with that, so they don't charge for that.
In practice I feel like the whole CA system is flawed because you're trusting the CA based on the authority assigned to it by a higher governing body, a governing body you can't necessarily be sure isn't getting some blank-check signing superpowers from the CA and doing man-in-the-middle attacks on persons of interest with bogus certs. I can't necessarily trust that the authorities have my best interests in mind so I can't trust the CA signing system.
I look forward to the author's proposed solution(s) to this problem.
I'm OK with showing IE6/7 users a polite suggestion to upgrade, but a certificate error looks unprofessional. In addition, Chrome on XP is also affected (if the user has missed the CA update) because Chrome doesn't carry its own list of trusted CAs.
Might be thinking of that.
I pay less for SSL certificates per year than I do for the domains I use them on. You can get a free certificate from StartSSL if you're just playing, or an $8 certificate from Comodo if you're more serious. Some registrars (cough Gandi cough) even include a free SSL certificate with every domain.
So the "total ripoff" thing has been all but solved by market competition (unless you prefer to splurge on a $800 certificate that doesn't do anything a $8 certificate can't do). It's really just the "insecure" part that needs to be addressed.