new | show | ask | jobs Github

philippta 6 hours ago

When I connect my server over SSH, I don't have to rotate anything, yet my connection is always secure.

I manually approve the authenticity of the server on the first connection.

From then, the only time I'd be prompted again would be, if either the server changed or if there's a risk of MITM.

Why can't we have this for the web?

▲

jsiepkes 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Why can't we have this for the web?

How do you propose to scale trust on first use? SSH basically says the trusting of a key is "out of scope" for them and makes it your problem. As in: You can put on a piece of paper, tell it over the phone, whatever, but SSH isn't going to solve it for you. How is some user landing on a HTTPS site going to determine the key used is actually trustworthy?

There have actually been attempts at solving this with some thing like DANE [1]. For a brief period Chrome had DANE support but it was removed due to being too complicated and being in (security) critical components. Besides, since DNSSEC has some cracks in it (you local resolver probably doesn't check it) you can have a discussion about how secure DANE is.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS-based_Authentication_of_Na...

▲

DANmode 2 hours ago | parent [-]

So DNS-adjacent protocols are supposed to be handling this TOFU directory,

but industry behemoths are too busy pushing other self-serving standards to execute together on this?

Am I…close?

	▲	tialaramex 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		What "TOFU directory" ? The whole point of TOFU is that you're just going to accept that anybody's first claim of who they are is correct. This is going to often work pretty well, after all it's how a lot of our social relationships work. I was introduced to a woman as Nodis, so, I called her Nodis, everyone else I know calls her Nodis, her boyfriend calls her Nodis. But it turns out her employer and the government do not call her that because their paperwork has a legal name which she does not like - like many humans probably her legal name was chosen by her parents not by her. Now, what if she'd insisted her name is Princess Charlotte. I mean, sure, OK, she's Princess Charlotte? But wait, my country has a Princess Charlotte, who is a little girl with some chance of becoming Queen one day (if her elder brother died or refused to be King). So if I just trusted that Nodis is Princess Charlotte because she said so, is there a problem?

▲

ILearnAsIGo 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Would the issue not be that you would need to trust that first connection?

	▲	01HNNWZ0MV43FF 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yep https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust_on_first_use

▲

jeroenhd 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

SSH has its own certificate authority system to validate users and servers. This is because trust-on-first-use is not scalable unless you just ignore the risk (at which point you may as well not do encryption at all), so host keys are signed.

There is quite literally nothing that prevents you from putting a self-signed server certificate. Your browser will even ask you to trust and store the certificate like your client does on the screen that shows the fingerprint.

Good luck getting everyone else to trust your fingerprint, though.

▲

trvz 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Cookie banners aren’t annoying enough for you?

	▲	philippta 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		For the handful of regularly visited websites, I wouldn't mind.