If FBI went to Godaddy and said, “We need a cert for www.google.com”, Godaddy would most likely refuse. Issuing that cert would leave a trail that would be extremely undesirable for both FBI and Godaddy.
Another option: Use ACME together with ARI (RFC 9773). The client checks ARI data every hour. If the cert needs to be replaced – for example like in this scenario – the CA will inform the client, which in turn would then request a new cert.
I know it’s not convenient to automate for every kind of device though. I guess in some of those cases it might be better to have a load balancer in front of the device. Or use an alternative PKI.
As a small child I liked Janosch’s books about the tiger and the bear. For example Ich mach dich gesund, sagte der Bär (I’ll Make You Well, Tiger, Said the Bear).
When I got a bit older I really enjoyed the Narnia books by CS Lewis. And The Belgariad by David Eddings.
I read a lot, but many titles are probably not available in English.
Hi there, hello you must be new here, so please permit me inform you about the English language usage that is perfectly normal for informal discourse.
"whack-a-mole" is a slang expression, derived from an arcade game (a physical game not a video game) where you actually took a hammer and whacked robotic moles on the head as they popped up.
"Playing whack-a-mole" with developers is not an incitement to violence of any kind, but simply a whimsical reference to the futility and perpetual Sisyphean task of dealing with such legal issues.
As someone whose father regularly smoke-bombed gophers in our front yard, I assure you that it is 100% legal to commit violence against gophers, moles, robotic moles, and it is also 100% ethical and moral to figuratively "play whack-a-mole" in the manner described by GP.
It is also very important to note, that no matter what anyone believes about Intellectual Property or Attorneys in general, that IP Lawyers are the self-same ones who protect F/OSS licenses and licensors, such as GNU FSF, MIT, BSD, Apache, Creative Commons; you name it. F/OSS is built upon the foundation of copyright ("copyleft" is no less than that). F/OSS would neither exist nor survive without IP Lawyers to protect the ideology.
Well, shouldn’t that be up to the original developer? He made a product and let people use it for free. But no-one is forced to use it. And there are other image editors without any ads. Some are proprietary, and some are FOSS, e.g. GIMP.
I don't know. Shouldn't it be up to Microsoft whether my copy of Windows reports back all of my personal data? Shouldn't it be up to Dell whether my computer can only boot Microsoft operating systems?
I don’t like ads either. So I just paid for a local image editor and use that one instead. The developer of the product gets paid, I get a great ad-free image editor.
reply