Home page logo

basics logo Security Basics mailing list archives

Re: SSL Certificate - Internal CA vs "well known CA"
From: Pranay Kanwar <warl0ck () metaeye org>
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 02:30:21 +0530

The following points can accommodate this

An open CA is vulnerable to key substitution and other forms of attacks.
Lets suppose you create a certificate and distribute it by email or on
the web how can one verify its correctness ? For example, if you website says
*install this certificate* how can one validate that your's certificate is
the intended one and no one during that time has compromised the connection
to your server and presented an invalid certificate ?.

The trusted CA's also use other forms of validation.

You can use internal CA and keep things secure, but again the certificate distribution
will be another cryptographic problem.


warl0ck // MSG

sfmailsbm () gmail com wrote:
Dear List,
Just wanted to understand why using a "well known 'trusted' CA" (e.g. verisign) is more secure than using an Internal 
CA to manage Certificates

e.g. if a company wants to publish a non-financial site (as opposed to, say, Internet Banking) would not an Internal 
CA be as Secure as an external one?

What is the real (security) benefit of using (expensive) external (e.g. Verisign) Certs?

Thanks you for your comments

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]