Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Most end users have no idea what HTTPS is. They've just been (incorrectly) taught that the padlock means it's secure. Disable the padlock for self-signed HTTPS, and disable the CA-signed HTTPS-only features, and it becomes strictly better than HTTP.



Especially because there is no way to MITM a connection with perfect-forward-secrecy only if it ends up serving a self-signed certificate, because the connection first negotiates an ephemeral key with which everything, including the certificate, will be encrypted.

This means that with eSNI and at least one CA-signed cert on the IP, any attacker runs the risk of having to spoof the CA-signed certificate.


A sophisticated attacker might know that you were going to connect to a self-signed site, though. Interestingly though, private DNS (DoH, etc.) might help further shroud this fact from the attacker.

All in all, I'd say that the browser should still throw up a full-page warning because of the implications of TOFU, but it can be one where the "continue to site" option is clearly shown even to a naïve user, and not hidden behind a spoiler.


Then maybe fall back to DANE and thus restrict this to zones signed with more than 1024bit RSA?




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: