So this video explains how https works. What I don’t get is what if a hacker in the middle pretended to be the server and provided me with the box and the public key. wouldn’t he be able to decrypt the message with his private key? I’m not a tech expert, but just curious and trying to learn.

  • lostmypasswordanew@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    All TLS/HTTPS clients have a set of Certificate Authority keys which they trust. Your client will only accept a public key which is signed by a trusted CA’s key. A proper CA will not sign a key for a domain when it has not verified that the entity that wants it’s key signed actually controls the domain.

    • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      A proper CA will not sign a key for a domain when it has not verified that the entity that wants it’s key signed actually controls the domain.

      Most browsers trust many certificate authorities from all over the world.

      Any of them could…

      • be compelled by authority
      • be compelled by threat
      • be hacked
      • have a lapse in ethics
      • have a rogue employee
      • etc.

      …and yes, it has happened already.

      HTTPS as most of us use it today is useful, but far from foolproof. This is why various additional measures, like certificate pinning, private CAs, and consensus validation are sometimes used.

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I urge everybody to read up on CA records in DNS and add them to your domains. They basically say what CA the certs for that domain are supposed to come from. Even if another CA issues valid certs for the domain they would be rejected if they don’t match the CA în DNS. It takes 5 minutes.

      • zeluko@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 month ago

        Thats why we now have certificate transparency reports and CA-records.
        Sure not perfect, but at least with a compliant CA it wont just happen in the dark.
        At some point you have to trust someone.

      • Nightwatch Admin@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        It is indeed true that some CAs have seriously misbehaved; however, browser builders are rather strict on the presence of the CAs they trust. Misbehaving or even simple errors are reasons for getting kicked out, after which certificates signed by those CAs are now no longer valid.

        • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Misbehaving or even simple errors are reasons for getting kicked out,

          That can be helpful if a transgression is noticed, and it’s not orchestrated by a higher authority (e.g. government), and the damage isn’t already done.

          browser builders are rather strict on the presence of the CAs they trust.

          Of course, browser builders are vulnerable to influence, attack, accidents, and blind spots just as certificate authorities are.

        • lily33@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’m somewhat skeptical. What if LetsEncrypt decided to misbehave tomorrow? Would the browsers have the guts to shut it down and break all sites using it?

          • Nightwatch Admin@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yes, they will. We’ve seen it before in mostly less serious cases: Diginotar, Türktrust, Symantec, etc. As brittle as the CA system can be, when there is real enough trouble, CAs do get revoked.

      • qwerty@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 month ago

        This is slightly off-topic but I was thinking about it and all of thoes isues can be solved by utilizing blockchain. Imagine a world where instead of CAs, decentralized domain (unstoppable domains, ENS etc.) owners publish their pub keys to the blockchain, the client can than query multiple nodes or store the chainstate locally. When establishing a connection client sends a secret handshake message + clients’ pub key encrypted with domains’ pub key. To complete the handshake server responds with the same secret message encrypted with clients’ pub key.

        • lily33@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          It seems to me like a MITM hacker can just redirect all requests to a Blockchain node towards their malicious node.