• 0 Posts
  • 45 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 29th, 2023

help-circle


  • I actually agree. For the majority of sites and/or use cases, it probably is sufficient.

    Explaining properly why LE is generally problematic, takes considerable depth of information, that I’m just not able to relay easily right now. But consider this:

    LE is mostly a convenience. They save an operator $1 per month per certificate. For everyone with hosting costs beyond $1000, this is laughable savings. People who take TLS seriously often have more demands than “padlock in the browser UI”. If a free service decides they no longer want to use OCSP, that’s an annoying disruption that was entirely not worth the $1 https://www.abetterinternet.org/post/replacing-ocsp-with-crls/

    LE has no SLA. You have no guarantee to be able to ever renew your certificate again. A risk not anyone should take.

    Who is paying for LE? If you’re not paying, how can you rely on the service to exist tomorrow?

    It’s not too long ago that people said “only some sites need HTTPS, HTTP is fine for most”. It never was, and people should not build anything relevant on “free” security today either.


  • gencha@lemm.eetoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldPaid SSL vs Letsencrypt
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    3 days ago

    People who have actually relevant use cases with the need for a reliable partner would never use LE. It’s a gimmick for hobbyists and people who suck at their job.

    If you have never revoked a certificate, you don’t really know what you’re doing. If you have never run into rate-limiting issues with LE that block a rollout, you don’t know what you’re doing.

    LE works until it doesn’t, and then it’s like every other free service on the internet: no guarantees If your setup relies on the goodwill of a single entity handing out shit for free, it’s not a robust setup. If you rely on that entity to keep an OCSP responder alive for free so all your consumers can verify the validity of your certificate, that’s not great. And people do this to save their company $1 a month for the real thing? Even running the shitty certbot in compute has a larger cost. People are so blindly in love with this “free” garbage. The fanboys will never die off





  • Numbers give the wrong impression that one version follows another. Debian release channels exit alongside each other individually. Giving the release channels names helps to make that distinction. It also makes for an easy layout of packages in APT repositories.

    Sid is and always has been Sid. If you were to assign numbers, what number should replace that name? There are perfectly working labels for release channels and there is no reasonable replacement.





  • That makes sense, but my understanding is, what Google considers Family content is not an add-on to regular content. Your content is not also for children, it is catered towards them. This implies using dedicated Google functionality, special SDKs, and so on, to comply with law. So your product needs to be designed in a very specific way to be eligible. I’m not aware of how Google Play restricts children from installing certain apps, but you can always install an app through a parental supervisor account.

    To me, this story seems like a lot of crying over a situation that is not fully explained.


  • I remember this mindset in myself. Today I consider it a waste of time.

    If you rely on any tool for this, the tool will make mistakes you cannot accept. If you do it manually, you will make mistakes as well and that also does not work. Also, the information your consider worthy for removal might be key to understanding the problem.

    Like, you remove your name, but a certain character in your name is what is actually tripping up the program.

    Ultimately, don’t post your logs publicly. In the past years, I was always able to email logs to devs. I have no reason not to trust them with my log. If they want data from me, they could easily exfiltrate it through their actual application.



  • If you are already familiar with one package manager, pick a distro that also uses that package manager.

    When deciding on the release track, the harder it is to recover the system, the more stable the track should be. Stable does not imply secure.

    As you move up through virtualization layers, the less stable the track needs to be, allowing access to more recent features.

    Steer clear of distros that pride themselves on using musl. It’s historically slow and incomplete. Don’t buy into the marketing.

    Think about IaC. Remote management is a lot more comfortable if you can consider your server ephemeral. You’ll appreciate the work on the day you need to upgrade to a new major release of the distro.