I have started looking into testing our site with BrowserStack.
However, I'm having issues with live-testing (as opposed to automated testing with Selenium, which mostly works fine) a site we're developing as we're serving it with a self-signed certificate.
Manually approving the certificate doesn't bother me as much as the fact that some Ajax request are failing (at least on IE10) due to security issues and this makes it impossible to actually manually test the site.
An acceptable solution would be to somehow add our self-signed cert. into the list of trusted root CAs. However, I haven't found out how to upload files into the BrowserStack test environment (not sure if that's even possible, really).
Any ideas ?
I contacted BrowserStack about this issue, and their formal response is:
"We currently do not support installing client certificates on the remote machines. However, this is on our list, and we’ll keep you posted."
Hopefully this issues will be resolved soon and I'll post a different answer here.
April 2021 update:
BrowserStack has shipped a toggle to trust self-signed certs.
It is available on iOS and Android devices for now.
When it happens, open the "Network" tab, and open in a new tab the request which is failing. If it is "just" a certificate issue, you would then be able to bypass the warning. Then, your request should work correctly.
When the "Cannot Verify Server Identity" dialogue pops up, click details, then 'Trust'. This will work if all calls are to the same domain as the website.
Related
PhpStorm version 2017.2.3:
I am suddenly getting notifications such as the screenshot below, and they're persistent:
I believe (as you may be able to gather from the image), that what is happening is that PhpStorm is trying to connect to the http://www.viridor.co.uk domain and then is being presented with an untrusted certificate from the (https) domain varient.
I keep telling PhpStorm to reject this certificate. I don't want it saved. But PhpStorm keeps bringing up this notice.
What I've tried:
I have read through the settings menu to see if I can find a way of sorting this but have not found anything suitable:
What I'd like to achieve:
Why does PhpStorm reject the certificate, can we edit these rejection criterias? this is the first time I've seen this and I'm sure PhpStorm has been checking a multitude of links from various project sites I work on. (please see below some certificate diagnostics)
How can I get PhpStorm to remember my rejection for this certificate?
If not, how can I turn off PhpStorm checking URLs outside the project scope (hopefully for just this project rather than all projects)?
Extra info:
I have run the url (viridor.co.uk) through the Qualys SSLTest and it came back
This server's certificate chain is incomplete. Grade capped to B.
source.
I would like to think that this certificates problems are the direct cause of this issue, but now I'd like to know how I can solve this issue.
I have a site running with an SSL certificate from Comodo/InstantSSL which should have 99% compatibility.
In my testing everything seems to work fine, however I've had some users send me screenshots of browser warnings about the security of my site:
Security warnings have been seen on IE 11 and Chrome 52 so the certificate should be valid.
The site is https://sololet.com
Can anyone tell me how I can debug this situation and find the problem, as like I said, it works fine for me on iPhone, iPad, Safari on MAC.
Thanks
I had such an issue with mobile clients (also a commodo certificate).
For (at least) Android clients you need to use a full-chain-certificate that includes your root- and intermediate certificate besides your domain certificate. This is also the result of a ssl-sitecheck at https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?viaform=on&d=sololet.com
You should have received both files from commodo or your respective reseller.
Combine all 3 files into one and use that file as certificate in your vhost configuration.
Combine like:
YOUR-CERT
ROOT-CERT
INTERMEDIATE-CERT
That solved our issue.
recently, I ordered a SSL certificate for my website. Prior to that, everything worked fine for me, the website was fast and I had no issue. Since the certificate has been installed by OVH... Well... Things changed... The issue is that not everybody has the same behaviour as me. When I go on "https://www.areaprog.com/" with different browsers, here is what I get:
Chrome:
"Your connection is not private
Attackers might be trying to steal your information from
www.areaprog.com (for example, passwords, messages or credit cards).
NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID"
Firefox:
"This connection is untrusted
You have asked Firefox to connect securely to www.areaprog.com, but we
can't confirm that your connection is secure.
Technical details:
www.areaprog.com uses an invalid security certificate.
The certificate is only valid for ssl2.ovh.net
(Error code: ssl_error_bad_cert_domain)"
Internet explorer:
"The security certificate presented by this website was issued for a
different website's address.
Security certificate problems may indicate an attempt to fool you or
intercept any data you send to the server."
I asked to OVH and everything is fine for them and apparently, it is also the case for other people out there (I asked around to see if I was the only one), but other people also experiences the same issue...
Moreover, Firebug keeps on saying:
"This site makes use of a SHA-1 Certificate; it's recommended you use
certificates with signature algorithms that use hash functions
stronger than SHA-1"
Besides, for people who are experiencing this issue, well, the site is extremely slow. For me, a simple page takes more than 20 seconds to load...
Does some of you have the same issue than me and does someone have an idea of what to say to OVH who keeps telling me that everything is OK?
Thanks a lot
I am using this webkitdotnet in my C# project. It all went well until I had to use access site with https.
I've searched their forum and found few posts about this but none of it solves my problem, so please shed some light on this one. Thx!
edit: Also as mentioned in their threads (also without an answer) I get a "Peer certificate cannot be authenticated with known CA certificates" error when trying to access my server, but https://www.google.com works fine.
They also mention the "apple" build which worked fine with ssl (at least so they say), but I can't find it anywhere...
This is a bit of a hack, but you can make webkitdotnet ingore peer ssl errors. WebKitDotNet uses WebKit, which, in turn uses curl, which is responsible for your wonderful ssl error there. curl exposes an option to ignore ssl errors, but neither webkit nor webkitdotnet seem to expose this functionality in their api. However, if you checkout the webkit source code, webkit sets the curl option (CURLOPT_SSL_VERIFYPEER) to false if the value of the environment variable WEBKIT_IGNORE_SSL_ERRORS is set to true.
What this all boils down to is that if you set the environment variable in code before initializing either webkit or webkitdotnet components, webkit will ignore the bad certificate and allow you to navigate to the site (sort of like clicking Proceed Anyway on IE9's Bad Certificate Warning page).
C++:
setvar("WEBKIT_IGNORE_SSL_ERRORS", "1");
C#:
Environment.SetEnvironmentVariable("WEBKIT_IGNORE_SSL_ERRORS", "1");
If anyone is interested, the webkit source code referenced is in file webkit\Source\WebCore\platform\network\curl\ResourceHandleManager.cpp at lines 65 and 681, currently.
After long googling I finally ended up purchasing a SSL certificate for my domain and now all is fine. Also, a good to note is that Webkit is the easiest to work with and allows for DOM access and manipulation.
I tried the code below and works for me.
webkitBrowser.Preferences.IgnoreSSLErrors = true;
I want to develop an app using Adobe AIR. But I have to sign it using a code signing certificate. I don't wan to buy a code signing certificate. Would it be OK if I distribute my app with a self-signed certificate?
The only difference between using a real certificate and a self-signed certificate is what the user sees in the initial installation dialog. With a real certificated they'll see a yellow "!" and the app will shown to be of "KNOWN" origin, and your company name will be shown. With a self-signed cert, there will be a red "?", and it will say the app's publisher is "UNKNOWN". You can see samples of the two dialogs at the very bottom of this page.
So realistically, it comes down to whether you're okay with people seeing a scary warning at install time. If you're only offering up the apps as a "use at your own risk" thing, or the app will be used mainly by a small group of people who already know who you are (an internal company app, e.g.) that may not be an issue, but if you hope for random internet people to come use your app and trust it, a cert may be a good idea.
That depends on your definition of "OK", but most likely no.
A self-signed certificate will not have been issued by a trusted CA, and your certificate will be considered untrusted by the client. I don't think (but have not tested) that the user is actively prevented from installing an app with an untrusted certificate, but they would at least get a warning, and that doesn't give your user a good first impression of your app.
If it's just for yourself or for a small group of people who know and trust you, then a self-signed certificate is most likely not a problem, but if you're distributing it to the world, you will almost certainly prefer a proper certificate.
I have recently looked into developing an Air App for the company to distribute to customers. On OSX Mavericks - on my mac and my designer's mac a red warning signs pops up stating that we are an unknown publisher - This was using the self signed certificate. The whole process was clunky with the installation, I had to verify that we were legitimate, as this warning sign inferred we were a looking to distribute something underhand.
From a marketing perspective this looked terrible.
In addition to this I managed to find someone to test the whole process of downloading the air app with a self signed cert on windows with an 'average' amount IT skills and this is what they said:
"Nah I didn't download it... it looked like it wanted to put a virus on my computer." And that is where download ended.
Currently we are looking to get some seal of trust on the application for distribution purposes.
Verisign, Thawte look interesting, although costly.
http://www.symantec.com/code-signing/adobe-air
https://www.thawte.com/code-signing/
Or read this page for more information
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/air/build/WS5b3ccc516d4fbf351e63e3d118666ade46-7ff0.html