• TeamAssimilation@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Let’s Encrypt is a trusted, established alternative, it could replace Microsoft for long-lived software certificates.

    Or tarnish its name associating it with malware and bad actors, who knows?

    • Luminous5481 [they/them]@anarchist.nexus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Let’s Encrypt is a trusted, established alternative, it could replace Microsoft for long-lived software certificates.

      Uh, no it could not.

      First of all, the whole point of signing software is to ensure it comes from a reputable source. Let’s Encrypt signs certificates with an automated process that does no verification whatsoever of the identity of the person asking for a certificate. It would make the whole process completely pointless.

      Second, Let’s Encrypt has stated themselves over a decade ago that they have no intention of doing this because it would render the whole system pointless.

      • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        The point of signing software is to ensure the software was not tampered from the publisher. Linux package managers solve this by comparing a gpg key from the publisher with the software’s. There is no need for a corporate giant to “vet” software.