Hi TJ,

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 07:43:32AM +0000, TJ wrote:
> Early I accessed a secure Debian server [1] that presented a X509 certificate 
> issued by an untrusted CA that turned out to be spi-inc.

SPI's CA is trusted by Debian and derivatives by default, and is available for
others to install from SPI's website. Since we realize the chicken-and-egg
problem, we also serve a copy of its fingerprint which is GPG-signed by SPI
board members / sysadmins using keys with many signatures in the
strongly-connected web of trust set.

http://www.spi-inc.org/ca/

The CA is not in Mozilla-based browsers or on non-Debian-based systems by
default because SPI has neither been able to afford nor justify fundraising for
the high financial cost of a WebTrust audit. (The issue of support in Debian's
Mozilla-based browser, if it hasn't been solved yet, is purely a client-side
technical issue. It may have been solved, I'm not sure.)

> Visiting spi-inc.org [2] I hit another issue with an invalid certificate 
> being presented causing Firefox to warn "The certificate is not valid for any 
> server names" (as well as certificate not
> trusted). The certificate's Common Name is "members.spi-inc.org" and there 
> are no Subject Alt Name  hosts.
> 
> How can we have trust in the CA when the CA itself cannot correctly manage 
> its own certificates?

While your empirical data is correct, your conclusion is not. There's no place
in which we link to the main SPI website using that URL; it's intended to be
viewed over unencrypted HTTP. The only SPI website which is meant for HTTPS
access is members.spi-inc.org, which is correctly reflected in the SSL
certificate.

You may ask why SPI hasn't signed up for one of the commercial options. Turns
out there really isn't a good one. Some examples: purchasing an official
intermediate CA would be expensive and we're smaller than the vendors typically
intend; Debian needs to run its own sub-CA for its system administrative needs;
the free SSL certificate options like StartSSL are not compatible with teams
like Debian which justifiably need a sysadmin team associated with the account
instead of an individual; etc. All of this is in addition to the very small
nature of the trust benefit of commercial CAs over what we have now.

- Jimmy Kaplowitz
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Spi-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general

Reply via email to