←back to thread

314 points Bogdanp | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
mocko ◴[] No.44379696[source]
I can see how this would work on a technical level but what's the intended use case?
replies(13): >>44379710 #>>44379735 #>>44379778 #>>44379786 #>>44379885 #>>44379946 #>>44380155 #>>44380377 #>>44380579 #>>44380856 #>>44381151 #>>44381389 #>>44386646 #
move-on-by ◴[] No.44380155[source]
Plenty of other responses with good use cases, but I didn’t see NTS mentioned.

If you want to use NTS, but can’t get an IP cert, then you are left requiring DNS before you can get a trusted time. If DNS is down- then you can’t get the time. A common issue with DNSSEC is having the wrong time- causing validation failures. If you have DNSSEC enforced and have the wrong time- but NTS depends on DNS, then you are out of luck with no way to recover. Having IP as part of your cert allows trusted time without the DNS requirement, which can then fix your broken DNSSEC enforcement.

replies(2): >>44380608 #>>44380660 #
Hizonner ◴[] No.44380608[source]
How are you going to validate an X.509 certificate if you don't know the time?
replies(3): >>44381483 #>>44382891 #>>44383899 #
move-on-by ◴[] No.44381483[source]
Oh this is a good point! Looking at my DNSSEC domain (hosted by CloudFlare) on https://dnssec-debugger.verisignlabs.com - the Inception Time and Expiration Time seems to be valid for... 3.5 days? This isn't something I look at much, but I assume that is up to the implementation. The new shortlived cert is valid for 6 days. So, from a very rough look, I expect X.509 certificate is going to be less time sensitive then DNSSEC - but only by a few days. Also, very likely to depend on implementation details. This is a great point.
replies(1): >>44383968 #
1. dcow ◴[] No.44383968[source]
Practically, though, you rely on hardware time until you get network time.