Re: Testing and certificates

On 14/10/13 11:40, Robin Berjon wrote:
> On 11/10/2013 17:15 , Tobie Langel wrote:
>> On Friday, October 11, 2013 at 5:05 PM, James Graham wrote:
>>> I don't really know how you would get a certificate for such a hostname
>>> though. A self-signed cert. isn't good enough since browsers will
>>> complain about it. I assume no CA will actually sign such a cert.
>>> (additionally, the name is theoretically resolvable; someone could pay
>>> for the .test tld. Hopefully that's not a big risk, but it's hard to
>>> know).
>> Why don't we just purchase a domain name and use it only for that?
> Yeah, in case I wasn't clear that's one of the options I was thinking
> of. I only mentioned using a non-existing TLD to provide perhaps
> stronger guarantee that it won't resolve, but we can easily just own the
> domain and pledge never to use it.

Hmm, well I don't have a concrete objection except that it feels very 
dubious to start passing a private key around, even if we are never 
going to use the domain for any other purpose. I would at least like 
someone who understand this stuff better than me to say that it's an OK 
idea before I agree to it :)

Received on Monday, 14 October 2013 10:48:58 UTC