Re: Security concern on various domain validating methods

2016-09-12 Thread Stephen Schrauger
On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 11:13:49 AM UTC-4, Han Yuwei wrote: > 在 2016年9月9日星期五 UTC+8上午12:00:15,Stephen Schrauger写道: > > Regarding the specific file verification method: > > > > It proves you control the web server that runs under the domain. Which is > > more or less all that you need to

Re: Security concern on various domain validating methods

2016-09-08 Thread Ryan Sleevi
On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 9:00:15 AM UTC-7, Stephen Schrauger wrote: > It proves you control the web server that runs under the domain. Which is > more or less all that you need to prove, since a TLS certificate is designed > for web security. > > If you don't control DNS, but you

Re: Security concern on various domain validating methods

2016-09-08 Thread Stephen Schrauger
Regarding the specific file verification method: It proves you control the web server that runs under the domain. Which is more or less all that you need to prove, since a TLS certificate is designed for web security. If you don't control DNS, but you do control the web server, you

Re: Security concern on various domain validating methods

2016-09-07 Thread Ryan Sleevi
On Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 10:43:34 AM UTC-7, Han Yuwei wrote: > I raise this question because of the Wosign's incident about high port > validating. Many CA use email validating such as send a email to > webmas...@foo.bar, or put a specific file into the root of website. > What I think

Security concern on various domain validating methods

2016-09-07 Thread Han Yuwei
I raise this question because of the Wosign's incident about high port validating. Many CA use email validating such as send a email to webmas...@foo.bar, or put a specific file into the root of website. What I think is that this cannot validate *domain* is yours. It just verified you have the