On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> wrote:
> Programs I can think of right now are browsers, ssh/scp, wget, curl,
> pop3s, imaps, gnutls, bind, apache, vsftpd, ldap, cups, subversion, and
> mysql.  Many of these will use openssl as the underlying implementation,
> but they may specify their own location for certificates.
>

I haven't used redhat in years, so I looked up a little about /etc/pki
to find out why they would go through the trouble of doing this.  It
looks like they essentially just plop all systemwide certificates in
subdirectories here.

Fedora draft:  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Certificates

A few examples...

/etc/pki/tls:
  appears to be the equivalent of /etc/ssl certificate content

/etc/pki/openldap:
  for ldap related certificates.  Other paths exist for each
application specific certificate store


Maybe there is merit to using /etc/pki that I've missed, but I'm not
convinced that it's better.  The only advantage I see is slightly
easier permissions handling and management of certificates without
hunting around /etc.

Perhaps if /etc/pki had more widespread support I would feel
differently.  This only touches on the subject of system wide pki
infrastructure as well;  there are still all of the same issues
involving user level pki stores which could theoretically be handled
in a similar fashion.

It's a neat idea but all support seems very specific to redhat.  I'm
even under the impression (but have been unable to find a source) that
they have their own scripts that help in handling the infrastructure.

I did stumble across a bunch of information from Mozilla on a related
subject - /etc/pki/nssdb.  I'm not sure if any other applications
beyond Firefox care about this though.  It doesn't even look like
Firefox has it down to a science yet either.  I'm going to read into
this one more before bringing it up any further though.

>
> I guess we should go ahead and continue to use /etc/ssl/certs and handle
> other situations as they come up as needed.
>

This is probably a lot easier.  Once I get my machine fully updated
I'll create a sandbox to play with this idea.  I'm not sure if I'll
follow the fedora draft 100% though since I don't entirely agree with
it.


Jonathan
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to