←back to thread

563 points joncfoo | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.417s | source
Show context
8organicbits ◴[] No.41205729[source]
My biggest frustration with .internal is that it requires a private certificate authority. Lots of organizations struggle to fully set up trust for the private CA on all internal systems. When you add BYOD or contractor systems, it's a mess.

Using a publicly valid domain offers a number of benefits, like being able to use a free public CA like Lets Encrypt. Every machine will trust your internal certificates out of the box, so there is minimal toil.

Last year I built getlocalcert [1] as a free way to automate this approach. It allows you to register a subdomain, publish TXT records for ACME DNS certificate validation, and use your own internal DNS server for all private use.

[1] https://www.getlocalcert.net/

replies(12): >>41206030 #>>41206106 #>>41206231 #>>41206513 #>>41206719 #>>41206776 #>>41206828 #>>41207112 #>>41208240 #>>41208353 #>>41208964 #>>41210736 #
yjftsjthsd-h ◴[] No.41206513[source]
Do you mean to say that your biggest frustration with HTTPS on .internal is that it requires a private certificate authority? Because I'm running plain HTTP to .internal sites and it works fine.
replies(6): >>41206577 #>>41206657 #>>41206669 #>>41208198 #>>41208358 #>>41210486 #
lysace ◴[] No.41206577[source]
There's some every packet shall be encrypted, even in minimal private VPCs lore going on. I'm blaming PCI-DSS.
replies(5): >>41206652 #>>41206686 #>>41206797 #>>41207668 #>>41207971 #
1. laz ◴[] No.41207668[source]
Exactly what an NSA puppet account would say!

Don't believe the hype. Remember the smiley from "SSL added and removed here"

https://blog.encrypt.me/2013/11/05/ssl-added-and-removed-her...

replies(1): >>41219942 #
2. lysace ◴[] No.41219942[source]
This "NSA puppet" is all for encrypting traffic between networks.

;-)