←back to thread

482 points sanqui | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
cjalmeida ◴[] No.42285429[source]
It gets worse. ICP-Brasil, the AC mentioned in the bug reports, the the government run agency responsible for all things related to digital signatures. Digitally signing a contract, a deed, accessing tax returns…
replies(2): >>42285683 #>>42286883 #
layer8 ◴[] No.42285683[source]
Unlike web browsers, digital signature use cases should perform revocation checks, so revoking the google.com certificate should solve that.
replies(3): >>42285783 #>>42285825 #>>42292286 #
1. lxgr ◴[] No.42285825[source]
The problem here isn't really that one mis-issued certificate, but rather the general problematic behavior of that CA reported in TFA.

If a CA can be convinced to issue a server certificate for google.com, would you feel very comfortable trusting their contract/deed/... signing certificates?

replies(1): >>42287529 #
2. Muromec ◴[] No.42287529[source]
If the government says you need to use their CA, you may feel the feelings, but you will still use them
replies(1): >>42298170 #
3. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.42298170[source]
What would stop me from purging all this CA's certificates from my computet?