Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> I don't understand, because the user has control over the browser store too.

i already mentioned that ("may or may not"). former or latter, per-app CA management is an abomination from security and administrative perspectives. from the security perspective, abandonware (i.e. months old software at the rate things change in this business) will become effectively "bricked" by out-of-date CAs and out-of-date revocation lists, forcing the users to either migrate (more $$$), roll with broken TLS, or even bypass it entirely (more likely); from the administrative perspective, IT admins and devops guys will have to wrangle each application individually. it raises the hurdle from "keep your OS up-to-date" to "keep all of your applications up-to-date".

> As an erstwhile pentester

exactly. you're trying to get in. per-app config makes your life easier. as an erstwhile server-herder, i prefer the os store, which makes it easier for me to ensure everything is up-to-date, manage which 3rd-party CAs i trust & which i don't, and cut 3rd-parties out-of-the-loop entirely for in-house-only applications (protected by my own CA).



It's baffling to me that anyone would expect browsers to make root store decisions optimized for server-herders. You're not their userbase!


neither are pentesters


Right, I don't think the pentester use case here is at all dispositive; in fact, it's approximately as meaningful as the server-herders.




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

Search: