this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
47 points (96.1% liked)

Selfhosted

40359 readers
304 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Hello friends,

Just about every guide that comes up on my Google search for "How to create certificate authority with OpenSSL" seems to be out-of-date. Particularly, they all guide me towards creating a certificate that gets rejected by the browser due to the "Common Name" field deprecation, and the requirement of "Subject Alternative Name" field.

Does someone know a tool that creates a Certificate Authority and signs certificates with that CA? A tool that follows modern standards, gets accepted by browsers and other common web tools. Preferably something based on OpenSSL.

If you know a guide that does this using OpenSSL, even better! But I have low hopes for this after going through dozens of guides all having the same issue I mentioned above.

Replies to Some Questions you Might Ask Me

Why not just correct those two fields you mention?

I want to make sure I am doing this right. I don't want to keep running into errors in the future. For example, I actually did try that, and npm CLI rejected my certs without a good explanation (through browser accepts it).

Why not Let's Encrypt?

This is for private services that are only accessible on a private network or VPN

If this is for LAN and VPN only services, why do you need TLS?

TLS still has benefits. Any device on the same network could still compromise the security of the communication without TLS. Examples: random webcam or accessory at your house, a Meta Quest VR headset, or even a compromised smartphone or computer.

Use small step CA (or other ACME tools)

I am not sure I want the added complexity of this. I only have 2 services requiring TLS now, and I don't believe I will need to scale that much. I will have setup a way to consume the ACME server. I am happier with just a tool that spits out the certificates and I manage them that way, instead of a whole service for managing certs.

If I am over estimating the difficulty for this, please correct me.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MaxHardwood@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

get a wildcard like *.example.org and you'll be done for everything

This actually only covers the subdomain. It doesn't extend to *.network.example.com. I spent last Saturday fighting my browsers until finding that out.

[–] TCB13@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I don’t get what’s the issue… you can ask them to issue a certificate that includes wildcard subdomains and the root domain. https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/how-to-expand-certificate-with-a-wildcard-subdomain/133925

[–] MaxHardwood@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

*.example.com like network.example.com only covers sub domains and not third level domains like host1.network.example.com or *.network.example.com

[–] TCB13@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Multi-level wildcards don’t exist at all - either don’t use wildcards or use a certificate with multiple wildcard names. Eg. *.xyz.example.org + *.abc.example.org.