Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A CRL is generated and published periodically, often at a defined interval. A CRL can also be published immediately after a certificate has been revoked. A CRL is issued by a CRL issuer, which is typically the CA which also issued the corresponding certificates, but could alternatively be some other trusted authority.
Since an OCSP response has less data to parse, the client-side libraries that handle it can be less complex than those that handle CRLs. [11] OCSP discloses to the responder that a particular network host used a particular certificate at a particular time. OCSP does not mandate encryption, so other parties may intercept this information. [2]
The Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP) allows clients to interactively ask a server (an OCSP responder) about a certificate's status, receiving a response that is cryptographically authenticated by the issuing CA. [29] It was designed to address issues with CRLs. [30] A typical OCSP response is less than 1 kB. [31]
X.509 and RFC 5280 also include standards for certificate revocation list (CRL) implementations. Another IETF-approved way of checking a certificate's validity is the Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP). Firefox 3.0 enabled OCSP checking by default, as did versions of Windows from at least Vista and later. [9]
OCSP stapling is designed to reduce the cost of an OCSP validation, both for the client and the OCSP responder, especially for large sites serving many simultaneous users. However, OCSP stapling supports only one OCSP response at a time, which is insufficient for certificate chains with intermediate CA certs. [26] [27]
It must be continuously updated with current CRL information from a certificate authority which issued the certificates contained within the CRL. While this is a potentially labor-intensive process, the use of a dedicated validation authority allows for dynamic validation of certificates issued by an offline root certificate authority .
CRL [114] OCSP [115] DANE (DNSSEC) [116] [117] CT [118] Botan: Yes Yes Yes Yes No Unknown Bouncy Castle: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Unknown BSAFE: Yes Yes Yes Yes No Unknown cryptlib: Yes Yes Yes Yes No Unknown GnuTLS: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Unknown JSSE: Yes Yes Yes Yes No No LibreSSL: Yes Yes Yes Yes No Unknown MatrixSSL: Yes Yes Yes Yes ...
Their use doesn't involve the problems of trusting third parties that may improperly sign certificates. Self-signed certificate transactions usually present a far smaller attack surface by eliminating both the complex certificate chain validation, [1] and certificate revocation checks like CRL and OCSP.