![]() ![]() N: See apt-secure(8) manpage for repository creation and user configuration details. N: Updating from such a repository can't be done securely, and is therefore disabled by default. Try installing ca-certificates.Į: The repository ' bionic Release' no longer has a Release file. Could not handshake: Error in the certificate verification. Get:4 bionic-backports InRelease Ĭertificate verification failed: The certificate is NOT trusted. Here is the result after running sudo apt-get update: Hit:1 bionic InRelease When trying to access the /node_10.x bionic Release If you’re IT admin for a large number of internal systems and don’t want to pay for certs, like a university, the *right* thing to do is just to make yourself a CA.Running sudo apt-get update on my AWS EC2 Ubuntu 18.04.01 LTS instance fails: Certificate verification failed: The certificate is NOT trusted. If you’re running a serious ecommerce business, then you’ll buy a Verisign cert and pay out the nose, but there are plenty of cheap options for other folks. Hackers stealing credentials usually set up bogus OWA, webmail, intra/extranet and hotspot login pages, the very thing lazy IT admins don’t bother configuring a real cert for. They’re worse than no cert in some ways, because they provide the illusion of security. People need to understand that it’s very easy to spoof or man-in-the-middle a site with an invalid cert or self-signed cert. Users are way too conditioned to click through error messages and warnings that read like gobbledygook to them. I certainly applaud FF for making me think twice!įor regular users who have no clue about how SSL works, it’s essential that they not just get the old one-screen click-thru. Now, I was adding an exception for my own webmail system, but the extra steps made me think twice about doing it, even for that. ![]() I just encountered FF’s new process for the first time, and at first glance it did seem a bit clunky, but it wasn’t any problem for me to step through and add an exception. Personally, I agree with the fact that Firefox properly warns me that I’m visiting a site with an invalid or self-signed certificate, but it would be nicer if the user interface that I’m presented with is less complicated, clearer, and easier to use. It’s not that these certificates are implicitly evil, it’s that they are implicitly untrusted – no one has vouched for them, so we ask the user. With a self-signed certificate, we don’t know whether to trust it or not. With a CA-signed cert, we trust that it is – CAs are required to maintain third party audits of their issuing criteria, and Mozilla requires verification of domain ownership to be one of them. The question isn’t whether you trust your buddy’s webmail – of course you do, your buddy’s a good guy – the question is whether that’s even his server at all. The Mozilla Foundation defends their decisions as being necessary to prevent malicious and fraudulent websites from carrying out their malintent. Heck, even Google forgets to update their certificates. However, big websites are also affected, such as the official website for the United States Army. The problem is that Firefox doesn’t just give you this page following expired certificates, but also with self-signed certificates – something especially annoying for smaller websites. A large portion will simply be scared away, thinking that the website is broken. However, the people most in need of a clear and explicit warning regarding SSL certificates are inexperienced users, and those are not very likely to understand the error message that Firefox 3 is displaying. The point of this change was to make web browsing safer, and that is a good thing. ![]() The new Firefox 3.0 exception interface, however, is a four-step process that is wholly unclear (the “Or you can add an exception” is easily overlooked), and will be especially difficult to grasp for ordinary, normal users – exactly the group of users the feature tries to protect. The OSNews backend apparently has an invalid security certificate, as well as various websites of my university, so whenever I re-install Firefox somewhere, I need to add an exception for each of these websites. When I encountered the page for the first time, I was at a loss as to what to do. ![]() Some new features, however, have met more resistance – one of them is the rather complicated user interface thrown at users when they reach a website with an invalid or expired SSL certificate. It added a load of new features, while also providing much-needed speed improvements and better memory management. Firefox 3.0, released not too long ago, was generally well-received. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |