December 18th, 2024

We have an unusual concern when we use Let's Encrypt

Chris Siebenmann raises concerns about Let's Encrypt's 6-day TLS certificates for large organizations like the University of Toronto, highlighting potential rate limit issues and risks of critical certificate expirations.

Read original articleLink Icon
We have an unusual concern when we use Let's Encrypt

Chris Siebenmann discusses concerns regarding the implementation of 6-day TLS certificates by Let's Encrypt, particularly in the context of a large organization like the University of Toronto. While he is not worried about Let's Encrypt's overall service reliability, he expresses anxiety about potential rate limit issues that could arise due to the high volume of certificate requests from the university. In the past, the university faced challenges with Let's Encrypt's initial rate limits, but these were resolved with changes to the issuance policies. However, the introduction of shorter certificate lifetimes could exacerbate the risk of hitting rate limits, especially if multiple requests coincide or if there is an unexpected surge in usage. With the current 90-day certificates, there is ample time to address any issues, but the 6-day certificates leave little room for error, particularly if renewals coincide with holidays or weekends. This situation could lead to critical certificates expiring without a timely renewal, which is a concern not typically faced by smaller organizations with less variable certificate needs.

- Let's Encrypt is introducing 6-day TLS certificates, raising concerns for large organizations.

- The University of Toronto may face rate limit issues due to high certificate request volumes.

- Previous rate limit challenges were resolved, but shorter certificate lifetimes increase risks.

- Limited renewal time could lead to critical certificate expirations during holidays or weekends.

- Smaller organizations may not experience the same level of concern regarding certificate renewals.

Link Icon 2 comments
By @hcfman - about 1 month
I think that concern is quite valid. But it's a choice I guess. I for one would not choose that option for exactly the argument you provide.

The damage caused by having your resource become unusable I think in most or a lot of cases is greater than the damage caused by a key compromise. The first damage is absolute. It will happen if you don't recover in time. The second type of damage is hyperthetical somewhat.

But okay, I expect that there are some use cases where the second sort of damage is more of a concern.

By @rospaya - about 1 month
My concern was that Let's Encrypt didn't have any issues generating certificates for trademarked names, something a lot of commercial providers didn't want to do without extra verification.