Closed. This question is not about programming or software development. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed last month.
Improve this question
I'm having a reading of this documentation on certificates in Azure App Service, and having trouble understanding this sentence, regarding the meaning of merging intermediate certificates:
If your certificate authority gives you multiple certificates in the certificate chain, you have to merge the certificates following the same order.
What is the purpose of CA giving multiple certificates in the certificate chain, if ultimately you have to merge them? Why not giving only one?
On the other hand, someone already holding multiple certificiates, why would they want to merge them, and not making use of them for multiple purposes?
By default each certificate is untrusted. If untrusted certificate signs another certificate then both are untrusted.
But there are self signed certificates issued by root certification authorities that are trusted.
These are installed in each computer. In windows you can view them in certmgr.msc
Press the Windows key + R to bring up the Run command, type certmgr.msc and press Enter.
These are certificates that are trusted.
Consider situation when some trusted certificate from Root CA "A" (for example) signs another certificate "B" and then "B" certificate signs "C" certificate.
Then "C" - "B" - "A" are creating chain of trust.
"C" references "B" and "B" references "A"
"C" certificate is trusted only if "B" certificate is included.
It's not enough that "C" certificate is signed properly. "B" certificate must be included to prove it.
That's reason why you have to merge certificates.
("A" certificate is not necessary in merge because it is from Root CA and is already stored in each PC)
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
If the SSL is all about encryption and public-private key, why we have multiple type of certificates(like regular and wildcard)?
Is there any third-party server in process of paid-certificates handshake?
The origin of the certificate does not matter for the TLS handshake itself. For the verification of the certificate it is only relevant if the issuing certificate agency is included in the applications or systems trust store. There are CA like Let's Encrypt which issue certificates for free and which are included in most systems trust store.
For the various types of certificates (wildcard etc) same can be said, i.e. it does not matter if this certificate was issued by a paid CA or not.
EV certificates are a bit different. These were historically considered special since the validation of the certificate owner was more tough and not everybody could get one. They were also more expensive due to this process. And only some CA would be able to issue such certificate and these CA where marked as such in the browsers But the relevance of these EV certificates is going down and some browsers already don't show them as special anymore.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
What is the main difference (may be pro/con list) between buying a custom SSL certificate and getting one from Free certificate provided by Let's Encrypt.
This is all about just having simple https in our Web Application
P.S I believe you understand what I am trying to do.
The main practical difference is to be trusted in all browsers and third party systems, for example Android, iOS or Windows.
Lets encrypt has taken this restriction into account and has proposed a solution that you can read on its website https://letsencrypt.org/certificates/
Our intermediate is signed by ISRG Root X1. However, since we are a very new certificate authority, ISRG Root X1 is not yet trusted in most browsers. In order to be broadly trusted right away, our intermediate is also cross-signed by another certificate authority, IdenTrust, whose root is already trusted in all major browsers. Specifically, IdenTrust has cross-signed our intermediate using their DST Root CA X3.
That is, in fact, their certificates are signed by a trusted 'usual' CA. So in practice there is no difference
Take a look at letsencrypt's own web certificate, it is signed by DST Root CA X3 (IdenTrust)
I have checked if CA is present in some keystore:
Chrome, IExplorer, Edge (using windows 10): OK
Mozilla Firefox: OK
Android (Nexus 5x -android 7): OK
Full list here: https://letsencrypt.org/docs/certificate-compatibility/
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I have been left in confusion for quite some time in deciding which CA should I approach to obtain a SSL certificate. Much comparison has been made from different CA but I do not see what is the key differences that sets each other apart except the price they offer. Of cause typical buyers would have just gone to the cheapest they can find buy me on the other hand would like to know what are they actually offering given the price difference I am very sure there will be something distinctive between each other.
Now back to my question, I wanted to purchase a wildcard SSL for my website because I have several running sub-domains and of cause I do not want to purchase and EV for each of the site since I am not running a super huge company yet. I am comparing between 3 different CA which offers wildcard SSL namely:
DigiCert Wildcard Plus - USD595/year
Comodo Wildcard SSL - USD405/year
Comodo PremiumSSL Wildcard from namecheap.com - USD169/year
GoDaddy Deluxe Wildcard SSL - USD399/year
Noted that I am intended to purchase for 1 year at current moment since the website is still under the pilot stage. Now to my understanding the only key difference I can see between these 3 is the insurance coverage. Off the major price difference, what else sets them apart from each other? Which one would you suggest me to get or is there any other reliable CA that you could recommend?
In addition I would also like to inform that I am making a purchase with budget constraints. Preferable something that is less than USD600 per year.
The main things to consider when purchasing a wildcard certificate are:
If you want the certificate to support the domain itself (e.g., domain.com) in addition to subdomains (*.domain.com), then make sure that the wildcard vendor you choose supports Subject Alternative Name extension.
Before you buy, make sure you know who you are buying from. The link you supplied is a reseller of Comodo certificates (not Comodo itself), which is why it is less expensive than the others. If you look, you will find several other vendors that sell inexpensive Comodo wildcard certificates. Most of the resellers are probably ok - just make sure that their root certificates are trusted with all of the major clients you want to support.
If you intend to use the wildcard certificate for shopping, you may want to get a certificate with Extended Validation (EV). Some certificate vendors may not offer this.
An SSL certificate may have multiple chains to different root certificates. If you intend to support older web clients (i.e., IE6, IE8, Java 6, 7, Android 2.3) then you want a certificate with a path to a SHA1 signature in addition to a path to a SHA2 signature.
Some vendors may provide 4096 bit certificates, others may provide 2048 bit certificates. A few years ago, the transition from 1024 bit to 2048 bit occurred at different times for different vendors.
Test first with a self-signed wildcard certificate, so that you know exactly what your minimum requirements are. You will need to create your own private key and CSR anyway, so self-signing is a good way to test before you buy.
If you are trying to keep costs low, then start with the lowest-cost certificate you can find. Most vendors will give you a 30-day trial certificate. Use that time to refine your web server configuration and test client compatibility. One of my sites uses a PremiumSSL Wildcard from Comodo and another is using a reseller's wildcard certificate, and when set up properly there is no noticeable difference.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Closed 9 years ago.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Improve this question
I own a domain at my DNS provider. I've pointed it to my house. My house keeps the IP address at the domain updated through dynamic DNS, so the A record always points to my IP address. I run OpenVPN at my house so I can connect from elsewhere. It's using a self-signed certificate. So, of course, I get SSL warnings when I connect.
My question is, Can I obtain an SSL certificate from StartSSL (free), set it up on OpenVPN, and get my browser to recognize the certificate as valid? For that matter, can I get any SSL certifcate to validate for any personal, development site I might set up at home in this situation? (OpenVPN.example.com, TestSite.example.com, etc)
(OpenVPN is not using port 443 or port 80, because I've heard that ISPs don't like it when you use those...)
The short answer is Yes. When creating a SSL certificate request you set the "common name" to the DNS name of the host. You can change the type of DNS record (e.g. A, CNAME, etc.) or record value (e.g. 192.168.1.2) at anytime as long as the record name (e.g. vpn.example.com) is the same.
For a browser to recognize a SSL certificate (not give warnings upon connection) a matching Certificate Authority (CA) must ship (or be manually added) to your browser or OS. To avoid SSL warnings with self-signed certificates you could instead provision a cert using a local/custom CA and install its root certificate on any necessary computers.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 12 years ago.
Improve this question
How come the prices on SLL certificates are so drastically varied? GoDaddy and Namecheap for example have them starting at $9 and $49 respectively. Then Verisign has them starting at $1500!
What's the difference? That's a huge price difference.
I have an application where each user account is on it's own subdomain, and so I need a certificate that covers them all.
Thoughts, suggestions?
The actual differences are:
Price
Support
Level of Certificate Validation
Who/what trusts the Root CA
Really, It all comes down to the Root CA (Certificate Authority).
Verisign's Root CA is trusted by pretty much every device and browser out there.
If you purchase a certificate from (say) GoDaddy, then it will probably be trusted by your major browsers and operating systems. However, if you need SSL certificates to work on a particular brand of set-top-box, or mobile device, then you need to find out what Root CA's they trust.
While the certificate from an untrusted Root CA will still be perfectly valid, the device (browser, gadget, whatever) has no way to verify that it's a legitimate certificate.
I believe the cost of an SSL cert generally comes down to things like encryption strength, issue time, update time, support, warranty, and things of that nature.
With regard to users on sub domains how about a wildcard ssl certificate from Comodo? Expensive but will cover your entire site in one hit.
http://www.instantssl.com/ssl-certificate-products/ssl/ssl-certificate-sgc-wildcard.html
Edit Found a comparison site http://www.whichssl.com/comparisons/index.html
there are diffrent types of levels of ssl, meaning more verified = more money in short...
It's all about the marketing. A Godaddy cert will get you just as far as a Verisign one (I know, I've had both).