PKI Consortium blog

You are invited to participate in the PKI Consortium’s first Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) conference
November 30, 2022 by Paul van Brouwershaven (Digitorus), Paul van Brouwershaven (Entrust) Kirk Hall (Entrust) Conference Post-Quantum Cryptography PQC
Speakers at this conference include some of the world’s top Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) experts and come from government science agencies, standards bodies, and private organizations at the forefront of this new challenge to digital security. Topics will cover the status of PQC standardization at NIST, ETSI, and IETF, government preparations, migration strategies, etc.

Why Are You Removing Website Identity, Google and Mozilla?
August 27, 2019 by Kirk Hall (Entrust), Tim Callan (Sectigo) CA/Browser Forum Chrome DV Encryption EV Firefox GDPR Google Identity Malware Mozilla Phishing SSL/TLS

You can’t have consumer privacy without having strong website identity

Today there’s a huge wave toward protecting consumer privacy – in Congress, with the GDPR, etc. – but how can we protect user privacy on the web without establishing the identity of the websites that are asking for consumer passwords and credit card numbers? Extended Validation (EV) certificates provide this information and can be very useful for consumers.

How Browser Security Indicators Can Protect You from Phishing
June 6, 2017 by Chris Bailey (Entrust), Kirk Hall (Entrust) Chrome DV Encryption EV Google Identity Phishing SSL/TLS

The media is full of stories about how phishing sites are moving rapidly to encryption using anonymous, free DV certificates they use to imitate login pages for popular sites, such as paypal.com.

As noted in the article PayPal Phishing Certificates Far More Prevalent than Previously Thought, more than 14,000 DV SSL certificates have been issued to PayPal phishing sites since the start of 2016.  Based on a random sample, 96.7% of these certificates were intended for use on phishing sites.

Practical Steps to Counter the Logjam Attack
May 26, 2015 by Kirk Hall (Entrust) Apple Attack Encryption Google MITM SSL/TLS Vulnerability

Another flaw has been found in the basic encryption algorithms that secure the Internet. This flaw, named the Logjam attack by its discoverers (researchers from various universities and companies), allows an attacker that can carry out man-in-the-middle (MitM) attacks to weaken the encryption used in secure connections (such as HTTPS, SSH, and VPNs). In theory, this means that an attacker (with sufficient resources) can break the encryption and read the “secure” traffic.

Who Sets the Rules Governing Certification Authorities?
August 19, 2014 by Kirk Hall (Entrust) CA/Browser Forum Code Signing DV Encryption ETSI EV Google Hash Function Identity IETF Microsoft Mozilla OCSP Policy Revocation Root Program SSL/TLS WebTrust

Every time something positive is published about SSL and encryption,such as Google’s recent decision making use of https encryption a favorable rating factor for a website, or negative, such as the Heartbleed issue – bloggers and others always post questions about public Certification Authorities (CAs), including general questions on who sets the rules that govern CAs. Some bloggers seem to assume there are no rules or standards, and that CAs can operate without any requirements or limitations at all — that’s incorrect.

CA Security Council Members Presentation at RSA 2014 Conference: New Ideas on CAA, CT, and Public Key Pinning for a Safer Internet
March 17, 2014 by Kirk Hall (Entrust) Attack CAA CASC Chrome EV Google IETF Microsoft Mis-issued OCSP Revocation RSA SSL/TLS Vulnerability

CA Security Council (CASC) members Trend Micro, Go Daddy, and Symantec participated in a discussion panel at the 2014 RSA Conference in San Francisco on February 24 entitled “New Ideas on CAA, CT, and Public Key Pinning for a Safer Internet.” Panel members included Kirk Hall of Trend Micro (Moderator), Wayne Thayer of GoDaddy (Panelist), and Rick Andrews of Symantec (Panelist).

Introduction to the Topic

Hall began by introducing the topic – all three alternative technologies (Certificate Transparency or CT, Certificate Authority Authorization or CAA, and Certificate Pinning) are intended to make the internet safer by dealing with mis-issued digital certificates, including so-called “rogue” certs like those obtained by a hacker from the now-defunct Diginotar Certification Authority (CA). Mis-issued certs generally present the greatest potential danger when they are for the most popular fraud target domains, such as mail.google.com, login.yahoo.com, login.live.com, etc.

How Organizations Are Authenticated for SSL Certificates
November 22, 2013 by Kirk Hall (Entrust) CA/Browser Forum CSR DV EV Identity OV Phishing Policy SSL/TLS

Certification Authorities (CAs) are trusted third parties that authenticate customers before issuing SSL certificates to secure their servers.

Exactly how do CAs authenticate these organizations? And where are the rules that determine what CAs must do during authentication?

The Rules on Customer Authentication

In the past, there were no common rules applicable to CAs as to minimum steps required to authenticate a customer before issuing an SSL certificate. Instead, each CA was permitted to create its own authentication processes, and was only required to describe the process in general terms in its public Certification Practice Statement (CPS). In many cases, the CPS authentication description was vague and hard to understand, and some CAs were less diligent than others during authentication.

Certificate Authority Audits and Browser Root Program Requirements
October 15, 2013 by Kirk Hall (Entrust) AICPA CA/Browser Forum CASC ETSI EV ISO ITU Microsoft Policy Qualified Root Program SSL/TLS WebTrust

Recent news stories have highlighted the need for strong security in online communications, and use of SSL certificates issued by a publicly trusted Certification Authority (CA) is perhaps the best way to achieve that. But why should the public trust SSL certificates issued from commercial CA roots, which are embedded as trust anchors in web browsers?

One answer is because of the multiple layers of standards and tough requirements that all commercial CAs must meet – and for which they are audited every year. These standards and requirements have increased from year to year over the past decade.