[Freedombox-discuss] some thoughts on URI namespaces
- Subject: [Freedombox-discuss] some thoughts on URI namespaces
- From: mail@ingostock.de (Ingo Stock)
- Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 23:12:42 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 5511E15A.4070509@ingostock.de>
- In-reply-to: <54A0F41B.8010800@projectdanube.org>
- References: <54A07A15.6050608@projectdanube.org> <54A09D82.6000908@ingostock.de> <54A0F41B.8010800@projectdanube.org>
On 29/12/14 07:26, Markus Sabadello wrote:
> If we add that to fbx, all our SSL problems should go away, right?
> No matter if we use subdomains or not..
Incidentally, i just stumbled upon a solution to the MITM vulnerability:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Security/Public_Key_Pinning.
With this and a compatible browser, the use of a CA should be secure, as
long as you check the fingerprint of the certificate on first use.
regards, ingo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20150324/d6471562/attachment.sig>
Reply to: