←back to thread

318 points Bogdanp | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.214s | source
Show context
Tepix ◴[] No.44384559[source]
I think certificates for IP addresses can be useful.

However, if Let‘s encrypt were to support S/MIME certificates, it would have a far greater impact. Since a few years, we have an almost comical situation with email encryption: Finally, most important mail user agents (aka mail clients) support S/MIME encryption out of the box. But you need a certificate from a CA to have a smooth user experience, just like with the web. However, all CAs that offer free trustworthy¹ S/MIME certificates with a duration of a year or more² have disappeared. The result: No private entities are using email encryption.

(PGP remains unused outside of geek circles because it is too awkward to use.)

Let‘s encrypt our emails!

¹ A certificate isn‘t trustworthy if the CA generates the secret key for you.

² With S/MIME you need to keep your old certificates around to decrypt old mails, so having a new one frequently is not practical

replies(7): >>44384654 #>>44384891 #>>44385019 #>>44385077 #>>44385105 #>>44386239 #>>44386412 #
2000UltraDeluxe ◴[] No.44385105[source]
A beautiful vision, but not practically viable. The average user isn't ready to handle private keys -- many can barely be trusted with their email passwords.

This means you either need centrally issued certificates for each domain, or face situations where legitimate users fail to obtain certificates, while cyber criminals send S/MIME-signed emails on the users' behalf.

Once a few generations of users have been trained to use passkeys then we can consider letting users handle key pairs.

replies(2): >>44387230 #>>44388964 #
1. Tepix ◴[] No.44388964[source]
If Lets encrypt sets up an automated system then MUAs could automatically request certificates for you. So the user wouldn’t have to deal with the issue.

There may be a need to distribute your certificate if you read and write mail on multiple devices.