-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 42
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
security recommendations #42
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
* TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 | ||
* TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 | ||
* TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384 | ||
* TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Per discussion on zulip, I'd suggest dropping the ciphersuites ending in _SHA
; good for backward compat, but since SHC is a new spec, using SHA-2 family is ok and recommended.
* TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256 | ||
* TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA | ||
1. Certificate expiration complies with the following: | ||
* No certificate issued after July 1st, 2019, can have a total lifetime of more than 825 days |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why keep the post-2019 req? Are we expecting endpoints using old cert issued between 2019 and 2020?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hey Christian, yeah, definitely. For our particular vantage point, issuers are using existing infrastructure to host these endpoints in the vast majority of cases. (And existing certs wouldn't become invalid per ATS until 12/4/2022).
No description provided.