I think it’s a good idea, everyone should be automating this anyway.

  • ramble81@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    There are a lot of embedded systems that do not offer API support to swap out certificates. Things like switches, dvr, nas devices, etc.

    • ShortN0te
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      How are those devices affected by having no notification anymore? The manual labor exists anyway.

      Most network switches and devices have a web gui to switch them out. Those can be automated.

    • rmuk@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      Honestly in rare situations that a device like that needs to be accessible from the wild Internet I think it’d be mad to expose it directly, especially if it’s not manageable as you suggest. At the very least, I’d be leaning on a reverse proxy.

      • ramble81@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        That implies though I don’t want valid certificates in my environment. I still want to make sure even on my private network I’m using valid certs. A lot of security departments require that too even if the device isn’t public facing.

        • IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Valid certificate is anything you trust. Any CA which you can trust is no more or less secure than the one you get from LE, so for the private network you can just happily sign your own certificates and just distribute the CA to your devices.

          • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            But then you have to distribute CAs to all the devices that will reach this service, and not all devices allow that.

            • IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              23 hours ago

              True. And there’s also a ton of devices around which don’t trust LetsEncrypt either. There’s always edge cases. For example, take a bit older photocopier and it’s more than likely that it doesn’t trust on anything on this planet anymore and there’s no easy way to update CA lists even if the hardware itself is still perfectly functional.

              That doesn’t mean that your self-signed CA, in itself, would be technically any less secure than the most expensive Verisign certificate you can find. And yes, there’s a ton of details and nuances here and there, but I’m not going to go trough every technical detail about how certificates work. I’m not an expert on that field by any stretch even if I do know a thing or two and there’s plenty of material online to dig deep into the topic if you want to.

              • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                23 hours ago

                I’m good. I know very well there are uses cases for a self signed cert. LE is still far more practical for 99% of use cases, even internally.

        • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          I’m with you, but that’s why I’m automating certificate expiry checking somewhere else (in my home assistant install to be exact).