Re: [CODE4LIB] [lita-l] Public institutions using Let's Encrypt for security certificates?

[Kyle Banerjee]

>
> I am not sure what Kyle means by "encryption hides attacks".


Interfaces designed for humans are frequent targets for attack. Network
monitoring tools are incredibly helpful for identifying compromised
machines, bots, and humans trying to bust in. So yes, encryption does hide
attack activity just as it hides everything else. There are other
legitimate reasons to monitor traffic such as to debug problems.

Encryption is a powerful and useful tool. But I wouldn't want to exaggerate
its effectiveness in protecting privacy nor ignore costs or consequences of
implementation. My guess is the vast majority of people on this list have
been hosed at some point by a technical decision made upstream from their
workflow that was based on what "everyone" needed or didn't.

kyle

Re: [CODE4LIB] [lita-l] Public institutions using Let's Encrypt for security certificates?

[Jonathan Rochkind]

PS: If one single server (or group of identical servers, horizontally
scaled) needs to respond to multiple hostnames, I would use a single SAN
cert with multiple hostnames.

If multiple entirely different servers just happen to be different *.
university.edu -- I would not use a SAN cert or a wildcard cert, I would
give them each their own separate cert.  This is, IMO, more
contemporary/"correct" operations -- one cert per server build, not one
cert per organization.

The reasons people used one cert per organization were mainly about cost
(of providers that charge you per cert), or with management difficulties,
both things letsencrypt is specifically meant to deal with to make one cert
per build possible. The advantages of one cert per build are security
partitioning, one machine being compromised has not compromised the SSL
certs for your entire organization.

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Jonathan Rochkind 
wrote:

> There's no reason you _need_ to use a wildcard cert for many hosts. You
> can use a separate cert for each. The reason people prefer a wildcard cert
> is because it was a pain to _get_ and keep track of all those certs.
>
> letsencrypt archicture encourages you to just do that. The certs are
> automatically obtained and automatically renewed, there's no reason you
> need the same cert accross multiple hosts, each host gets it's own cert.
> (Which also means if one of them gets compromised, and you need to revoke a
> cert, you just need to revoke one host's cert, not a wildcard cert applying
> to all of them).  (And yes, automatic renewals are not hard with
> letsencrypt, it's specifically intended you do automated renewals, there
> are a variety of software and scripts for different environments to do it).
>
> I don't see anything wrong with that, really.
>
> There are cases where you really do need a wildcard cert -- an app which
> has _dynamic_ hostnames, like a hostname for each user account (eg
> jrochkind.github.io).  letsencrypt isn't going to work there, you really
> do need a wildcard cert.
>
> But just for a lot of hosts on the same TLD? They don't need a wildcard
> cert, and there are reasons to prefer them _not_ having a single wildcard
> cert (the revocation case, especially if they are all administered by
> different units), they can each just have their own cert.
>
> I am not sure what Kyle means by "encryption hides attacks".  Personally,
> I think SSL encryption is a requirement for contemporary professionally
> managed websites.  But the question of whether to use https or not at all
> --  is really a separate issue than whether to use letsencrypt/acme for
> your SSL certs.  If you decide you don't want/need https/SSL encryption at
> all, then you don't need to consider letsencrypt as opposed to a more
> manual cert provider at all. :)
>
> I don't see any real reason letsencrypt would not be viable for a library.
> You do need to have enough sysadmin ability to set up the automatic
> renewals, and understand what's going on, yes, that could be a barrier I
> suppose.  The main potential barrier I see is letsencrypt rate limits on
> hosts-per-tld, for an academic institution that is going to have
> hundreds/thousands of hosts within the TLD (*.university.edu). It seems
> they will exempt a university from these rate limits with an email request.
>
>
> I feel like there's a lot of FUD about letsencypt going around for some
> reason.
>
> I believe there are lots of all letsencrypt certs granted somewhere, it
> might be possible to find those and look for *.edu's to find peer
> institutions.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Kyle Banerjee 
> wrote:
>
>> I almost wrote it wouldn't work, but what works always depends on the
>> particulars of your situation. For example, depending on how many domains
>> you need and what mechanisms you're using, you might be able to use
>> Subject
>> Alternative Name (SAN) certificates to mitigate the lack of a wildcard
>> certificate. Another thing I was thinking about as I wrote that is that a
>> growing number of libraries provision resources with vendors such as
>> Amazon
>> -- for that, you'll need the cooperation of your institution.
>>
>> Automating renewal is a good practice. Remember when when the doi.org
>> cert
>> expired a few years back? Wasn't pretty and could have worked out much
>> worse had the domain squatters been on the ball. It's not hard to
>> automate,
>> and instructions are easy enough to find. Even when squatters aren't an
>> issue, expired certs cause all kinds of scary warnings.
>>
>> One of the big problems libraries face is that a lot of free stuff is not
>> viable for many libraries that need help the most. The whole problem is
>> these institutions often lack both staff and technical resources. And even
>> if they do have someone with the requisite skills to build great stuff out
>> of virtually nothing, they risk serious problems when that person 

Re: [CODE4LIB] [lita-l] Public institutions using Let's Encrypt for security certificates?

[Jonathan Rochkind]

There's no reason you _need_ to use a wildcard cert for many hosts. You can
use a separate cert for each. The reason people prefer a wildcard cert is
because it was a pain to _get_ and keep track of all those certs.

letsencrypt archicture encourages you to just do that. The certs are
automatically obtained and automatically renewed, there's no reason you
need the same cert accross multiple hosts, each host gets it's own cert.
(Which also means if one of them gets compromised, and you need to revoke a
cert, you just need to revoke one host's cert, not a wildcard cert applying
to all of them).  (And yes, automatic renewals are not hard with
letsencrypt, it's specifically intended you do automated renewals, there
are a variety of software and scripts for different environments to do it).

I don't see anything wrong with that, really.

There are cases where you really do need a wildcard cert -- an app which
has _dynamic_ hostnames, like a hostname for each user account (eg
jrochkind.github.io).  letsencrypt isn't going to work there, you really do
need a wildcard cert.

But just for a lot of hosts on the same TLD? They don't need a wildcard
cert, and there are reasons to prefer them _not_ having a single wildcard
cert (the revocation case, especially if they are all administered by
different units), they can each just have their own cert.

I am not sure what Kyle means by "encryption hides attacks".  Personally, I
think SSL encryption is a requirement for contemporary professionally
managed websites.  But the question of whether to use https or not at all
--  is really a separate issue than whether to use letsencrypt/acme for
your SSL certs.  If you decide you don't want/need https/SSL encryption at
all, then you don't need to consider letsencrypt as opposed to a more
manual cert provider at all. :)

I don't see any real reason letsencrypt would not be viable for a library.
You do need to have enough sysadmin ability to set up the automatic
renewals, and understand what's going on, yes, that could be a barrier I
suppose.  The main potential barrier I see is letsencrypt rate limits on
hosts-per-tld, for an academic institution that is going to have
hundreds/thousands of hosts within the TLD (*.university.edu). It seems
they will exempt a university from these rate limits with an email request.


I feel like there's a lot of FUD about letsencypt going around for some
reason.

I believe there are lots of all letsencrypt certs granted somewhere, it
might be possible to find those and look for *.edu's to find peer
institutions.

Jonathan



On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Kyle Banerjee 
wrote:

> I almost wrote it wouldn't work, but what works always depends on the
> particulars of your situation. For example, depending on how many domains
> you need and what mechanisms you're using, you might be able to use Subject
> Alternative Name (SAN) certificates to mitigate the lack of a wildcard
> certificate. Another thing I was thinking about as I wrote that is that a
> growing number of libraries provision resources with vendors such as Amazon
> -- for that, you'll need the cooperation of your institution.
>
> Automating renewal is a good practice. Remember when when the doi.org cert
> expired a few years back? Wasn't pretty and could have worked out much
> worse had the domain squatters been on the ball. It's not hard to automate,
> and instructions are easy enough to find. Even when squatters aren't an
> issue, expired certs cause all kinds of scary warnings.
>
> One of the big problems libraries face is that a lot of free stuff is not
> viable for many libraries that need help the most. The whole problem is
> these institutions often lack both staff and technical resources. And even
> if they do have someone with the requisite skills to build great stuff out
> of virtually nothing, they risk serious problems when that person leaves
> and they can't replace them with someone with similar abilities.
>
> It is taken as gospel here that encryption is always good, but it's always
> important to be aware of tradeoffs. For example, encryption hides
> attacks.  It can instill a false sense of security -- there are lots of
> ways to track activity that aren't affected by encryption. It prevents
> caching and complicates complying with CIPA as well as state law filtering
> requirements, and it could create issues if your services must communicate
> with legacy apps.
>
> kyle
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Kyle Breneman 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for chiming in, Kyle.  I think, in your second-to-last sentence,
> you
> > were about to say "impossible."  Is that right?  Also is it difficult to
> > setup automatic certificate renewal?  For the record, I'm not trying to
> > bypass any organizational processes here, just doing some legwork in
> hopes
> > of handing campus IT a suggestion that will save them money.
> >
> > Kyle
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Kyle 

Re: [CODE4LIB] [lita-l] Public institutions using Let's Encrypt for security certificates?

[Junior Tidal]

We use it for our library.

Best,
Junior


Junior Tidal
Associate Professor
Web Services and Multimedia Librarian
New York City College of Technology, CUNY 
300 Jay Street, Rm A434
Brooklyn, NY 11201
718.260.5481
 
http://library.citytech.cuny.edu



-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG] On Behalf Of William 
Denton
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:57 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] [lita-l] Public institutions using Let's Encrypt for 
security certificates?

On 18 June 2017, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:

> I'm actually having trouble finding an academic institution, or even a 
> standard ecommerce site, that DOES use an EV cert.

Where I work the library moved over to HTTPS a few months ago, and I'm happy to 
say we have one, thanks to university IT:

https://www.library.yorku.ca/web/

Bill
--
William Denton :: Toronto, Canada :: https://www.miskatonic.org/ Caveat lector.

Re: [CODE4LIB] [lita-l] Public institutions using Let's Encrypt for security certificates?

[Kyle Banerjee]

I almost wrote it wouldn't work, but what works always depends on the
particulars of your situation. For example, depending on how many domains
you need and what mechanisms you're using, you might be able to use Subject
Alternative Name (SAN) certificates to mitigate the lack of a wildcard
certificate. Another thing I was thinking about as I wrote that is that a
growing number of libraries provision resources with vendors such as Amazon
-- for that, you'll need the cooperation of your institution.

Automating renewal is a good practice. Remember when when the doi.org cert
expired a few years back? Wasn't pretty and could have worked out much
worse had the domain squatters been on the ball. It's not hard to automate,
and instructions are easy enough to find. Even when squatters aren't an
issue, expired certs cause all kinds of scary warnings.

One of the big problems libraries face is that a lot of free stuff is not
viable for many libraries that need help the most. The whole problem is
these institutions often lack both staff and technical resources. And even
if they do have someone with the requisite skills to build great stuff out
of virtually nothing, they risk serious problems when that person leaves
and they can't replace them with someone with similar abilities.

It is taken as gospel here that encryption is always good, but it's always
important to be aware of tradeoffs. For example, encryption hides
attacks.  It can instill a false sense of security -- there are lots of
ways to track activity that aren't affected by encryption. It prevents
caching and complicates complying with CIPA as well as state law filtering
requirements, and it could create issues if your services must communicate
with legacy apps.

kyle



On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Kyle Breneman 
wrote:

> Thanks for chiming in, Kyle.  I think, in your second-to-last sentence, you
> were about to say "impossible."  Is that right?  Also is it difficult to
> setup automatic certificate renewal?  For the record, I'm not trying to
> bypass any organizational processes here, just doing some legwork in hopes
> of handing campus IT a suggestion that will save them money.
>
> Kyle
>
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Kyle Banerjee 
> wrote:
>
> > There are a few other catches. For example, you need to be able to run an
> > appropriate ACME client and set up automatic certificate renewal since
> the
> > maximum length you can get is 90 days. You also can't get wildcard
> > certificates which makes doing things like proxying by host name (e.g.
> > ezproxy). Your organization might also care if you bypass their process
> for
> > getting domain names.
> >
> > kyle
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 5:41 AM, Jonathan Rochkind 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Here's a thread about per-TLD rate limits being a problem for
> > universities;
> > > it seems per a post at the end of that thread that letsencrypt might
> > exempt
> > > your institution from ratelimits, but an official agent of the
> university
> > > needs to submit the request:
> > >
> > > https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/rate-limiting-at-an-
> > > educational-institution/5910/24
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Kyle Breneman <
> tomeconque...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for that detailed and interesting reply, Jonathan.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Jonathan Rochkind <
> jonat...@dnil.net
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Just to clarify, by "Commercial certificates offer stronger proof
> of
> > > > > identity", you mean an "Extended Validation" (EV) certificate.
> > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Validation_Certificate
> > > > >
> > > > > If you are getting a 'commercial certificate' that is a standard
> > > 'domain
> > > > > validated' cert instead of an EV cert, you are not getting any
> > stronger
> > > > > proof of identity than you would from letsencrypt.
> > > > >
> > > > > The cert used at https://www.ubalt.edu does NOT appear to be an EV
> > > cert,
> > > > > but an ordinary domain validated one. (Additionally, that
> particular
> > > web
> > > > > page serves http: images , triggering browser mixed content
> > warnings!).
> > > > >
> > > > > Same thing for the cert at https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/.
> > > > >
> > > > > Looking at another Maryland public university:  https://umd.edu/
> > > appears
> > > > > similar. NOT an EV cert, and additionally serving http assets
> > > triggering
> > > > a
> > > > > mixed content warning.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm actually having trouble finding an academic institution, or
> even
> > a
> > > > > standard ecommerce site, that DOES use an EV cert.
> > > > >
> > > > > You can tell it's an EV cert when chrome or Firefox put the name of
> > the
> > > > > organization in the location bar to the left of URL.  Additionally,
> > in
> > > > > Firefox, if you click that name, then click the right-chevron 'more
> > > 

Re: [CODE4LIB] [lita-l] Public institutions using Let's Encrypt for security certificates?

[Cary Gordon]

In my experience, it has become very easy to setup renewal. It has gotten
easier with every release.

Cary

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 7:55 AM Kyle Breneman 
wrote:

> Thanks for chiming in, Kyle.  I think, in your second-to-last sentence, you
> were about to say "impossible."  Is that right?  Also is it difficult to
> setup automatic certificate renewal?  For the record, I'm not trying to
> bypass any organizational processes here, just doing some legwork in hopes
> of handing campus IT a suggestion that will save them money.
>
> Kyle
>
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Kyle Banerjee 
> wrote:
>
> > There are a few other catches. For example, you need to be able to run an
> > appropriate ACME client and set up automatic certificate renewal since
> the
> > maximum length you can get is 90 days. You also can't get wildcard
> > certificates which makes doing things like proxying by host name (e.g.
> > ezproxy). Your organization might also care if you bypass their process
> for
> > getting domain names.
> >
> > kyle
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 5:41 AM, Jonathan Rochkind 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Here's a thread about per-TLD rate limits being a problem for
> > universities;
> > > it seems per a post at the end of that thread that letsencrypt might
> > exempt
> > > your institution from ratelimits, but an official agent of the
> university
> > > needs to submit the request:
> > >
> > > https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/rate-limiting-at-an-
> > > educational-institution/5910/24
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Kyle Breneman <
> tomeconque...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for that detailed and interesting reply, Jonathan.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Jonathan Rochkind <
> jonat...@dnil.net
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Just to clarify, by "Commercial certificates offer stronger proof
> of
> > > > > identity", you mean an "Extended Validation" (EV) certificate.
> > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Validation_Certificate
> > > > >
> > > > > If you are getting a 'commercial certificate' that is a standard
> > > 'domain
> > > > > validated' cert instead of an EV cert, you are not getting any
> > stronger
> > > > > proof of identity than you would from letsencrypt.
> > > > >
> > > > > The cert used at https://www.ubalt.edu does NOT appear to be an EV
> > > cert,
> > > > > but an ordinary domain validated one. (Additionally, that
> particular
> > > web
> > > > > page serves http: images , triggering browser mixed content
> > warnings!).
> > > > >
> > > > > Same thing for the cert at https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/.
> > > > >
> > > > > Looking at another Maryland public university:  https://umd.edu/
> > > appears
> > > > > similar. NOT an EV cert, and additionally serving http assets
> > > triggering
> > > > a
> > > > > mixed content warning.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm actually having trouble finding an academic institution, or
> even
> > a
> > > > > standard ecommerce site, that DOES use an EV cert.
> > > > >
> > > > > You can tell it's an EV cert when chrome or Firefox put the name of
> > the
> > > > > organization in the location bar to the left of URL.  Additionally,
> > in
> > > > > Firefox, if you click that name, then click the right-chevron 'more
> > > info'
> > > > > icon, then click "More information", under "Website Identity" it
> will
> > > > list
> > > > > an "Owner:" for an EV cert. For an ordinary domain-validated cert,
> it
> > > > will
> > > > > list "This website does not supply ownership information" instead.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here's an example of an EV cert, the cert on digicert.com, a
> seller
> > of
> > > > > certs:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://www.digicert.com/
> > > > >
> > > > > If your cert is not EV but is just "domain validated", then despite
> > it
> > > > > being "commercial" it supplies the same level of proof of identity
> > as a
> > > > > letsencrypt cert -- proof of control of the domain at the time the
> > cert
> > > > was
> > > > > issued, either way.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Cary Gordon  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > We are starting to roll out LetsEncrypt for all of our services
> and
> > > > > > clients who do not use or want commercial certificates.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Note that LetsEncrypt offers only domain authentication, in most
> > > cases
> > > > > > specifically validated by your control of the server. Commercial
> > > > > > certificates offer stronger proof of identity.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We recommend commercial certificates for any sites that conduct
> > > > financial
> > > > > > transactions or require HIPPA compliance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cary
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cary Gordon
> > > > > > The Cherry Hill Company
> > > > > > http://chillco.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Jun 16, 2017, at 

Re: [CODE4LIB] [lita-l] Public institutions using Let's Encrypt for security certificates?

[Jonathan Rochkind]

Here's a thread about per-TLD rate limits being a problem for universities;
it seems per a post at the end of that thread that letsencrypt might exempt
your institution from ratelimits, but an official agent of the university
needs to submit the request:

https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/rate-limiting-at-an-educational-institution/5910/24



On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Kyle Breneman 
wrote:

> Thanks for that detailed and interesting reply, Jonathan.
>
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Jonathan Rochkind 
> wrote:
>
> > Just to clarify, by "Commercial certificates offer stronger proof of
> > identity", you mean an "Extended Validation" (EV) certificate.
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Validation_Certificate
> >
> > If you are getting a 'commercial certificate' that is a standard 'domain
> > validated' cert instead of an EV cert, you are not getting any stronger
> > proof of identity than you would from letsencrypt.
> >
> > The cert used at https://www.ubalt.edu does NOT appear to be an EV cert,
> > but an ordinary domain validated one. (Additionally, that particular web
> > page serves http: images , triggering browser mixed content warnings!).
> >
> > Same thing for the cert at https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/.
> >
> > Looking at another Maryland public university:  https://umd.edu/ appears
> > similar. NOT an EV cert, and additionally serving http assets triggering
> a
> > mixed content warning.
> >
> > I'm actually having trouble finding an academic institution, or even a
> > standard ecommerce site, that DOES use an EV cert.
> >
> > You can tell it's an EV cert when chrome or Firefox put the name of the
> > organization in the location bar to the left of URL.  Additionally, in
> > Firefox, if you click that name, then click the right-chevron 'more info'
> > icon, then click "More information", under "Website Identity" it will
> list
> > an "Owner:" for an EV cert. For an ordinary domain-validated cert, it
> will
> > list "This website does not supply ownership information" instead.
> >
> > Here's an example of an EV cert, the cert on digicert.com, a seller of
> > certs:
> >
> > https://www.digicert.com/
> >
> > If your cert is not EV but is just "domain validated", then despite it
> > being "commercial" it supplies the same level of proof of identity as a
> > letsencrypt cert -- proof of control of the domain at the time the cert
> was
> > issued, either way.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Cary Gordon 
> wrote:
> >
> > > We are starting to roll out LetsEncrypt for all of our services and
> > > clients who do not use or want commercial certificates.
> > >
> > > Note that LetsEncrypt offers only domain authentication, in most cases
> > > specifically validated by your control of the server. Commercial
> > > certificates offer stronger proof of identity.
> > >
> > > We recommend commercial certificates for any sites that conduct
> financial
> > > transactions or require HIPPA compliance.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Cary
> > >
> > > Cary Gordon
> > > The Cherry Hill Company
> > > http://chillco.com
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Jun 16, 2017, at 12:34 PM, Kyle Breneman (via lita-l Mailing
> List) <
> > > lit...@lists.ala.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Apologies for cross-posting...
> > > >
> > > > Anyone out there working at a public institution that's using Let's
> > > Encrypt for security certificates?  I just suggested to our campus IT
> > that
> > > we switch to using Let's Encrypt.  They told me it would need to clear
> > > State of Maryland approval process first, and suggested that it would
> be
> > > helpful to be able to point to other public institutions that are using
> > it.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Kyle Breneman
> > > > Integrated Digital Services Librarian
> > > > University of Baltimore
> > > >
> > > > To maximize your use of LITA-L or to unsubscribe, see
> > > http://www.ala.org/lita/involve/email
> > >
> >
>

Re: [CODE4LIB] [lita-l] Public institutions using Let's Encrypt for security certificates?

[Kyle Breneman]

Thanks for that detailed and interesting reply, Jonathan.

On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Jonathan Rochkind 
wrote:

> Just to clarify, by "Commercial certificates offer stronger proof of
> identity", you mean an "Extended Validation" (EV) certificate.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Validation_Certificate
>
> If you are getting a 'commercial certificate' that is a standard 'domain
> validated' cert instead of an EV cert, you are not getting any stronger
> proof of identity than you would from letsencrypt.
>
> The cert used at https://www.ubalt.edu does NOT appear to be an EV cert,
> but an ordinary domain validated one. (Additionally, that particular web
> page serves http: images , triggering browser mixed content warnings!).
>
> Same thing for the cert at https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/.
>
> Looking at another Maryland public university:  https://umd.edu/ appears
> similar. NOT an EV cert, and additionally serving http assets triggering a
> mixed content warning.
>
> I'm actually having trouble finding an academic institution, or even a
> standard ecommerce site, that DOES use an EV cert.
>
> You can tell it's an EV cert when chrome or Firefox put the name of the
> organization in the location bar to the left of URL.  Additionally, in
> Firefox, if you click that name, then click the right-chevron 'more info'
> icon, then click "More information", under "Website Identity" it will list
> an "Owner:" for an EV cert. For an ordinary domain-validated cert, it will
> list "This website does not supply ownership information" instead.
>
> Here's an example of an EV cert, the cert on digicert.com, a seller of
> certs:
>
> https://www.digicert.com/
>
> If your cert is not EV but is just "domain validated", then despite it
> being "commercial" it supplies the same level of proof of identity as a
> letsencrypt cert -- proof of control of the domain at the time the cert was
> issued, either way.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Cary Gordon  wrote:
>
> > We are starting to roll out LetsEncrypt for all of our services and
> > clients who do not use or want commercial certificates.
> >
> > Note that LetsEncrypt offers only domain authentication, in most cases
> > specifically validated by your control of the server. Commercial
> > certificates offer stronger proof of identity.
> >
> > We recommend commercial certificates for any sites that conduct financial
> > transactions or require HIPPA compliance.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Cary
> >
> > Cary Gordon
> > The Cherry Hill Company
> > http://chillco.com
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 16, 2017, at 12:34 PM, Kyle Breneman (via lita-l Mailing List) <
> > lit...@lists.ala.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Apologies for cross-posting...
> > >
> > > Anyone out there working at a public institution that's using Let's
> > Encrypt for security certificates?  I just suggested to our campus IT
> that
> > we switch to using Let's Encrypt.  They told me it would need to clear
> > State of Maryland approval process first, and suggested that it would be
> > helpful to be able to point to other public institutions that are using
> it.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Kyle Breneman
> > > Integrated Digital Services Librarian
> > > University of Baltimore
> > >
> > > To maximize your use of LITA-L or to unsubscribe, see
> > http://www.ala.org/lita/involve/email
> >
>

Re: [CODE4LIB] [lita-l] Public institutions using Let's Encrypt for security certificates?

[Jonathan Rochkind]

Just to clarify, by "Commercial certificates offer stronger proof of
identity", you mean an "Extended Validation" (EV) certificate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Validation_Certificate

If you are getting a 'commercial certificate' that is a standard 'domain
validated' cert instead of an EV cert, you are not getting any stronger
proof of identity than you would from letsencrypt.

The cert used at https://www.ubalt.edu does NOT appear to be an EV cert,
but an ordinary domain validated one. (Additionally, that particular web
page serves http: images , triggering browser mixed content warnings!).

Same thing for the cert at https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/.

Looking at another Maryland public university:  https://umd.edu/ appears
similar. NOT an EV cert, and additionally serving http assets triggering a
mixed content warning.

I'm actually having trouble finding an academic institution, or even a
standard ecommerce site, that DOES use an EV cert.

You can tell it's an EV cert when chrome or Firefox put the name of the
organization in the location bar to the left of URL.  Additionally, in
Firefox, if you click that name, then click the right-chevron 'more info'
icon, then click "More information", under "Website Identity" it will list
an "Owner:" for an EV cert. For an ordinary domain-validated cert, it will
list "This website does not supply ownership information" instead.

Here's an example of an EV cert, the cert on digicert.com, a seller of
certs:

https://www.digicert.com/

If your cert is not EV but is just "domain validated", then despite it
being "commercial" it supplies the same level of proof of identity as a
letsencrypt cert -- proof of control of the domain at the time the cert was
issued, either way.



On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Cary Gordon  wrote:

> We are starting to roll out LetsEncrypt for all of our services and
> clients who do not use or want commercial certificates.
>
> Note that LetsEncrypt offers only domain authentication, in most cases
> specifically validated by your control of the server. Commercial
> certificates offer stronger proof of identity.
>
> We recommend commercial certificates for any sites that conduct financial
> transactions or require HIPPA compliance.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Cary
>
> Cary Gordon
> The Cherry Hill Company
> http://chillco.com
>
>
> > On Jun 16, 2017, at 12:34 PM, Kyle Breneman (via lita-l Mailing List) <
> lit...@lists.ala.org> wrote:
> >
> > Apologies for cross-posting...
> >
> > Anyone out there working at a public institution that's using Let's
> Encrypt for security certificates?  I just suggested to our campus IT that
> we switch to using Let's Encrypt.  They told me it would need to clear
> State of Maryland approval process first, and suggested that it would be
> helpful to be able to point to other public institutions that are using it.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kyle Breneman
> > Integrated Digital Services Librarian
> > University of Baltimore
> >
> > To maximize your use of LITA-L or to unsubscribe, see
> http://www.ala.org/lita/involve/email
>

Re: [CODE4LIB] [lita-l] Public institutions using Let's Encrypt for security certificates?

[Cary Gordon]

We are starting to roll out LetsEncrypt for all of our services and clients who 
do not use or want commercial certificates.

Note that LetsEncrypt offers only domain authentication, in most cases 
specifically validated by your control of the server. Commercial certificates 
offer stronger proof of identity.

We recommend commercial certificates for any sites that conduct financial 
transactions or require HIPPA compliance.

Thanks,

Cary

Cary Gordon
The Cherry Hill Company
http://chillco.com


> On Jun 16, 2017, at 12:34 PM, Kyle Breneman (via lita-l Mailing List) 
>  wrote:
> 
> Apologies for cross-posting...
> 
> Anyone out there working at a public institution that's using Let's Encrypt 
> for security certificates?  I just suggested to our campus IT that we switch 
> to using Let's Encrypt.  They told me it would need to clear State of 
> Maryland approval process first, and suggested that it would be helpful to be 
> able to point to other public institutions that are using it.
> 
> Regards,
> Kyle Breneman
> Integrated Digital Services Librarian
> University of Baltimore
> 
> To maximize your use of LITA-L or to unsubscribe, see 
> http://www.ala.org/lita/involve/email