this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2025
344 points (99.1% liked)

Selfhosted

53285 readers
1038 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
344
Decreasing Certificate Lifetimes to 45 Days (letsencrypt.org)
submitted 1 day ago by artiman@piefed.social to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
123 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Let’s Encrypt will be reducing the validity period of the certificates we issue. We currently issue certificates valid for 90 days, which will be cut in half to 45 days by 2028.
This change is being made along with the rest of the industry, as required by the CA/Browser Forum Baseline Requirements, which set the technical requirements that we must follow. All publicly-trusted Certificate Authorities like Let’s Encrypt will be making similar changes. Reducing how long certificates are valid for helps improve the security of the internet, by limiting the scope of compromise, and making certificate revocation technologies more efficient.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 47 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

The point is, if the certificate gets stolen, there's no GOOD mechanism for marking it bad.

If your password gets stolen, only two entities need to be told it's invalid. You and the website the password is for.

If an SSL certificate is stolen, everyone who would potentially use the website need to know, and they need to know before they try to contact the website. SSL certificate revocation is a very difficult communication problem, and it's mostly ignored by browsers because of the major performance issues it brings having to double check SSL certs with a third party.

[–] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 1 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

That's what Carla are for.

[–] AtariDump@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

How did you reply to a deleted comment?

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 1 points 5 hours ago

Probably the comment has federated to lemmy.world, but the deletion of the comment hasn't yet.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Looks like autoincorrect did a s/CRLs/Carla/ for you.

[–] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago

And that somehow Lemmy didn't federate my deletion!

[–] Lyra_Lycan@lemmy.blahaj.zone -4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

But browsers have a marker for dangerous sites - surely Cloudflare, Amazon or Google should have a report system and deliver warnings at the base

[–] False@lemmy.world 10 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

Browsers are only a (large) fraction of SSL traffic.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

So is there an example of SSL certs being stolen and used nefariously. Only thing that sticks out to me is certificate authorities being bad.