undefined

points

[-]

"I use arbitrarily complex software that has a rapid SDLC to obfuscate the issue with the fact that we have to have military grade encryption for displaying the equivalent of a poster over the internet".

The state of our industry is such that there will be a lot of people arguing for this absurdity in the replies to me. (or I'll be flagged to death).

Package integrity makes sense, and someone will make the complicated argument that "well ackshually someone can change the download links" completely ignoring the fact that a person doing that would be quickly found out, and if it's up the chain enough then they can get a valid LE cert anyway, it's trivially easy if you are motivated enough and have access to an ASN.

by harmonics3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Nah, you've simply never lived in a country which is afraid of its own population and does (or tried to) MITM internet traffic. Mine does both, there was a scandal several years ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20472179

I'll take enforced HTTPS for absolutely everything, thank you very much. Preferably with certificate pinning and similar aggressive measures to thwart any attempts to repeat this.

by ratorx3 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Changing the links and doing nothing else would be a pretty dumb MITM. You could do a more complex variant which is not so easy to spot (targeting specific networks, injecting malware whilst modifying the checksum)

The key property of SSL that is useful for tamper resistance is that it’s hard to do silently. A random ASN doing a hijack will cause an observable BGP event and theoretically preventable via RPKI. If your ISP or similar does it, you can still detect it with CT logs.

Even the issuance is a little better, because LE will test from multiple vantage points. This doesn’t protect against an ISP interception, but it’s better than no protection.

by hug2 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

People will argue with you because your initial quoted sentence is chock full of fallacies.

* Caddy's complexity (especially when it comes to TLS) is not arbitrary, it's to meet the needs of auto-renewal and ... y'know, hosting sites on TLS.

* Caddy's SDLC is not, as far as I understand it, especially rapid.

* Implying that "military grade" is some level of encryption beyond the minimum level of encryption you would ever want to use is silly.

* The Manjaro website is not "the equivalent of a poster", and in fact hosts operating system downloads. Operating system integrity is kinda important.

You may have reasonable arguments for sites that are display only, do not out-link, and do not provide downloads, but this is not one of those circumstances.