Domas Mituzas <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Most browsers (and RSS readers and ...) will bark at it as
>> "(potentially) unsafe". Therefore, IMHO Wikimedia should
>> either use established CA's certificates or publish informa-
>> tion on the "private" (or CAcert) certificates on a trust-
>> worthy server, in paper publications, etc. where it can be
>> used to verify the certificates.

> I know what happens when self-signed certificate is used.
> Why the heck is that an issue with wikitech.wikimedia.org wiki?

Because when you access
<URI:https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/>, it will bark :-).
Would not all references to wikitech.leuksman.com have been
advertizing the HTTPS access (and the Google ratio is still
about 55900:209 :-)), I would not care. But IMVHO *if* HTTPS
requests are served, that should be done "properly".

>> P. S.: Yes, it *is* highly unlikely that
>>       wikitech.wikimedia.org's A record gets hijacked and a
>>       MITM attack is staged as little could be gained.

> And then what?
> I for one use HTTP to access that wiki, feel free to hijack my
> account, and, um, vandalize. You won't need to do MITM for that,
> actually, will save you some effort.

> I thought there're more important issues out there ;-)

I can assure you you are *very* right on that thought :-).

Tim


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to