Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

John Levine Security Considerations #40

Closed
upros opened this issue Feb 6, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #54
Closed

John Levine Security Considerations #40

upros opened this issue Feb 6, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #54

Comments

@upros
Copy link
Owner

upros commented Feb 6, 2023

In the Security Considerations, it says that it is expected that the registrar wil use RFC 3007 updates to put records into the DNS. In my admittedly limited ACME experience, it's more common to use a local API to talk to whatever is managing the DNS. (I rolled my own API for my own DNS toaster and acme.sh, because I could.) Is it really limited to RFC 3007 updates? If not, you might want to reword it more generally to say it's going to use something to update the DNS, and if the credentials leak, that would be bad.

I agree with the advice to limit the name scope of updates, and if possible the RRTYPEs. My API only lets the ACME client update CAA and TXT records since that's all ACME needs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant